Opinion
April 17, 1930.
April 18, 1930.
Practice, C.P. — Appeal from order refusing judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense.
On an appeal from an order refusing a judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, the order will be affirmed unless it is "clear and free from doubt" that the lower court erred in refusing to enter the judgment.
Appeal No. 11, April Term, 1931, by plaintiff, from order of C.P. Allegheny County, October Term, 1929, No. 1861, in the case of Wailes Dove-Hermiston Corporation v. Walworth Company.
Before TREXLER, P.J., KELLER, LINN, GAWTHROP, CUNNINGHAM, BALDRIGE and GRAFF, JJ. Affirmed.
Assumpsit to recover for materials furnished. Before MARTIN, J.
Motion for judgment for want of sufficient affidavit of defense.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.
The Court dismissed the motion for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Plaintiff appealed.
Error assigned was the order of the court.
Edward G. Bothwell, of Morris, Walker, Bothwell Harrison, for appellant.
Frederick Shoemaker, and with him William F. Knoell, of Shoemaker Knoell, for appellee.
Argued April 17, 1930.
This appeal is from an order refusing judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. After reading the pleadings, and considering argument of counsel, we cannot say it is "clear and free from doubt" that the court below erred in refusing judgment; following the usual course pursued in such cases, we shall not disturb the orders appealed from; nor shall we discuss the applicable rules of law, till an opportunity is had fully to develop the facts at trial: Philadelphia v. Merchant Evans Co., 289 Pa. 578; Hulton v. Union Ice C.S. Co., 291 Pa. 447; Jaffe v. Lipsky Bros., 291 Pa. 470, and Real Estate-Land Title Tr. Co., Executor, v. Fidelity Mutual L.I. Co., 295 Pa. 90.
The order appealed from is affirmed.