The Lackawanna

Jurist

Containing Decisions of the Supreme
and Superior Courts of Pennsylvania,
and of the Various Courts of Lacka-
wanna County, Together with a
Number of Cases Decided in Other
Courts Between January, 1904, and

January, 1905.

VOLUME V.

Edited by FRANK J. FITZSIMMONS,

: A Member of the Lackawanna County Bar.

SCRANTON, PA.

1905

REPORTED IN VOLUME V.

....

....

....

.....

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.............

...................

......................

115
115

271

PAGE.
Ackerman, J. O., vs. Joseph Josephs.........

.... 25
Abbey, N. W.. Vs. Joseph Hannick et al...

....
Bucher vs. Boyer.........

.........
Becker vs. Becker.......... ..................

.. 144
Baylor et al. vs. J. W. Tiffany...................

161
Baylor et al. vs. J. W. Tiffany...................

. 163
Brown, J. L., vs. The Moosic Mountain Coal Co.......

258
Burk, John, vs. The Wilkes-Barre & Scranton Railway Co..

260

Caulk, L. D., vs. Blythe R. White et al.......... ..................... • 1

Cunningham vs. Ocean Coal Co..........

. 172

Commonwealth vs. David B. Evans....

Commonwealth ex. rel., P. J. Moore, Inspector of Mines, etc., vs. The Price-

Pancoast Coa Company............................................ 1.

Commonwealth ex. rel., W. R. Lewis, District Attorney vs. Frank Becker,

Sheriff ...

Commonweatlh vs. Patrick J. O'Boyle..

.. 133

Commonwealth vs. Nice & Schreiber.

148

Commonwealth vs. Resh .........

155

Commonwealth vs. Schulte .............

158

Commonwealth vs. Miller .....

. 174

Commonwealth vs. Vance ....

179

Commonwealth vs. Richard Little s..... ............

.....

Commonwealth ex. rel., John McAndrews vs. Edward A. Jones, County Con-

troller ........ .

328

Commonwealth ex. rel., L. M. Evans, Inspector of Mines, etc.. Vs. The Morss

Hill Coal Company......

364

Carey, James S., Assigned vs. Hugh B. McAndrews........

196

Cole Hiram vs. Emmet M. Lowery............

............................ 225

Coray, E. A., vs. John S. Jenkins.

242

Duffy vs. Mell...........................................................

167

Finnegan, Ann, vs. Martin Walsh et al........

.................. ....
German Building & Loan Association, The, No. 9 vs. Michael Grecula.
Gibbons, Mary, vs. Scranton Railway Co............

38

Gibney vs. Pennsylvania Motor Car Company.........................

153

Gardner. Nelson A., vs. S. G. Shoemaker.........
Hill, Minnie, vs. The Erie Railroad Company........
Hosie, Michael, vs. Joseph E. Hosie.....

. 44

Hamill vs. Andresa,k ....

.. 162

Hertgen vs. Reed:.........

. 177

Hill vs. Mervine................

182

Hartman, Jacob. vs. Scranton Steel Company...........

339

Hartman, Jacob, vs. Scranton Steel Company...........

358

In Re: Estate of Maria Donnelly Nallin, deceased.............

10

Estate of William Bestford, deceased............

Certificate of Nomination of M. J. Burns et al.........

Estate of John Handley, deceased...

Estate of Joseph Chase, deceased.....

.......

266

28

262

15

......................

13

..................................................

95

101

..

102
138
154
160
166
170
190
206
292
299
301
331
335

336

McCuen's Estate .......
Balmforth's. Estate .....

....................................

''''''''.
Ephrata Township Road............

..
Volan's Estate ......... .......................................

..
Martin's Estate ........
Appeal of Dunmore District from report of Borough 'Officers

.
Rhoades' Estate ....

...
Maule's Estate ................................................. ..
'Hortz's Estate ...........

........................................ ..
Wyoming County Road........................................
Sunderland's Estate .............................................
Appeal of Dunmore School District from report of Auditors....
· Dickersors Petition ..................
Petition of William Silkman, deceased......
Insolvency of Paul Yurkman...............
Estate of John Mason, deceased...........
Road in Spring Brook Township.................................
Appeal of Hillside Coal & Iron Company from assessment, ist ward,

Mayfield .................... ............... ......................

Petition of County Commissioner for discharge of Michael Roche
Jermyn, J. J., vs. Joseph A. Scranton et al. .....

..
Jones, Thomas R., vs. Mike Rosetta et al......

.
Jones, William F., vs. Elizabeth S. C. Vail.........
Jermyn, Joseph J., vs. City of Scranton et al...............
Kaufhold, Henry, vs. William J. Burke..........
LaFrance, Warren, vs. Lackawanna & Wyoming Valley Railway Company....
Litts, Elizabeth, et al. vs. Margaret Cook...........
Miller, W. G., vs. George W. Kramer et al.................
Mulherin & Judge Lumber Company vs. Edward Jones................
Mock, J. W., vs. Andrew Rauschmayer.....................

idi.
Mellersh vs. Eden.............

...
Neuls, John A., vs. City of Scranton....
Norton Michael vs. S. N. Kramer...........
Powell vs. Perkins....................
Pace, A. M., vs. Martin Mullarkey........
Providence & Abington Turnpike & Plank Road Company vs. Jane Reap....
Rehm vs. Askew et al........
Ranck vs. Brackbill.......

......

...
Ripple, Ezra H., vs Richard Little......................................

...
Rinker, F. S., vs. The Aetna Life Insurance Company......
Security Building & Loan Savings Union, The, vs. Jesse G. Colvin.......
State Capitol Building & Loan Association vs. Michael Roche. : ........
Shurtleff, E. H., vs. New York Storage Warehouse Company et al........
Scranton, City of, vs. N. G. Robinson......

..........

..
Scranton, City of, vs. Alexander Straff. ...................

..
Smith, George F., et al. vs. Henry Summerhill...........
: Taylor, The Borough of, vs. W. P. Boland et al. .........
· Weber, William, vs. Henry Berger..............r............................

..
Walker, George A., vs. Annette Reynolds et al. ......................
Winton, B. M., Admr., etc., use of Winton Coal Company, Ltd. vs. Lackawanna

. . Coal Company, Ltd............ ....................................
Walsh Joseph J., vs. John F. Langan..........
Zeno, Rose, vs. Albert Zeno.........................

...

74
107
257
293
223
129
197
22

72

:

147

187

31

.86

:

150
248
251

142

157
193
238

41

REPORTED IN VOLUME V.

ABATEMENT.
A plea in
• Defendant cannot plead in abatement after he has filed an affidavit of defence.

A defendant who has made defence on the merits in a case before a justice
of the peace cannot plead in abatement on the appeal. -Cunningham vs. Ocean
Coal Company. 172.

AFFIDAVIT OF DEFENCE.
Where goods levied on under a landlord's warrant were replevined by the
lessees wife, on whose replevin bond a married woman was the surety no objec-
tion being made thereto and judgment was entered for want of an affidavit of
defence, the plaintiff will not be ruled to perfect her bond and the defendant
permitted to file an affidavit of defence on a petition not embodying a prayer for
the opening of the judgment.

The fact that the surety on a replevin bond is a married woman, the bond being
approved by the prothonotary and his action unappealed from, does not render the
writ of replevin absolutely nugatory and void.

The court will not open, at the instance of new counsel, a judgment allowed
to be entered through the failure to take the right course, or mistake of law, or
negligence of former counsel for the defendant.--Rehm vs. Askew et al. 142.

Duffy vs. Mell, -166.-See Demurrer.

The principle is well settled in Pennsylvania that in an action upon a judg-
ment in the court of another state, the record may be contradicted by evidence
of facts impeaching jurisdiction.

In order to prevent judgment the defendant must aver some defect in the
jurisdiction in the court of another state, either of the person, or of the subject
matter of the suit, or of the amount of the judgment.-James S. Carey Assigned
to George H. Johnson vs. Hugh B. Andrews. 196.

APPEAL.
Appeal of Dunmore District from report of Borough Auditors for 1903. 138

Where a case on the trial list is continued three days before the beginning
of the term, at the instance of the defendant. who is ordered to pay such costs
as the plaintiff might incur by reason of the continuance, and it is agreed that
counsel for the plaintiff shall notify the eleven witnessess subpoenaed for the
plaintiff of the continuance, and said riotification is made by the constable who
served the subpoenas, the constable's compensation for serving the notices will
not be allowed as costs in addition to his fees for serving the subpoenas.-Ranck
vs. Brackbill.—157.

ARREST OF JUDGMENT.
Special incompetency to testify in a particular case does not of itself invo:ve
incompetency to make an information or appear as prosecutor in the same case.