Case Name: Franklin Sugar R. Co. v. John et al., Appellants
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1922-05-08
Citations: 274 Pa. 205
Docket Number: Appeal, No. 86
Parties: Franklin Sugar R. Co. v. John et al., Appellants.
Judges: Before Moschzisker, C. J., Frazer, Walling, Simpson and Sadler, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania State Reports
Volume: 274
Pages: 205–206

Head Matter:
Franklin Sugar R. Co. v. John et al., Appellants.
Argued March 30, 1922.
Appeal, No. 86, Oct. T., 1922, by defendants, from order of C. P. Allegheny Co., Oct. T., 1921, No. 1585, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, in case of Franklin Sugar Refining Co. v. Simon John et al., trading as Simon John & Bros. Co.
Before Moschzisker, C. J., Frazer, Walling, Simpson and Sadler, JJ.
Reversed.
Thos. F. Garrahan, with him J. A. Langfitt, Jr., and J. A. Langfitt, for appellants.
Henry 8. Drinker, Jr., with Mm Thomas Heath, Jr., David A. Reed and George Wharton Pepper, for appellee.
May 8, 1922:

Opinion:
Per Curiam,
In tMs case the court below entered judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, in an action founded on certain sales memoranda of the same character as that quoted in our opinion in Franklin Sugar Refining Company v. Howell, filed herewith [reported above]. The questions raised and decided there are controlling here also, and hence the same judgment must be entered.
The judgment of the court below is reversed and a procedendo is awarded.