From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Leibfried et al. v. Horn

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Oct 27, 1928
143 A. 786 (Pa. 1928)

Summary

In Leibfried v. Horn, 294 Pa. 137, 138, 143 A. 786, the orders were in this form: "It is adjudged that plaintiffs have not set out a good cause of action," and "after reargument we adhere to our opinion that the statement filed does not set out a good cause of action.

Summary of this case from McClelland v. West Penn Apl. Co.

Opinion

October 27, 1928

Appeals — Final order — Defective appeal.

1. An appeal cannot be taken until after a final judgment has been entered in the case.

2. An order stating that "it is adjudged that plaintiffs have not set out a good cause of action," is not a final order from which an appeal can be taken.

3. To make such an order final there should be added some such words as "and judgment is now entered for defendant."

Appeal, No. 220, Jan. T., 1928, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., March T., 1927, No. 9671, adjudging that plaintiffs have not a good cause of action, in case of Harry W. Leibfried et al., trading as Liebfried Shatz, v. Herman C. Horn. Appeal quashed.

Rule for judgment on affidavit of defense in lieu of demurrer.

The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.

The court below made the following order: "It is adjudged that plaintiffs have not set out a good cause of action." Plaintiffs thereupon appealed.

Error assigned was order as above, quoting record.

H. Leon Bennett and Samuel D. Goodis, for appellants.

Brown Williams, for appellee.


In answer to plaintiff's statement of claim, defendant filed an affidavit of defense in lieu of demurrer. On July 13, 1927, the court below made the following order: "It is adjudged that plaintiffs have not set out a good cause of action." Plaintiffs petitioned for reargument, and this was granted November 16, 1927. On January 23d, the court below ruled: "after reargument we adhere to our opinion that the statement filed does not set out a good cause of action." Plaintiff appealed to us from this order. Appellee has moved to quash, on the grounds that the only appealable order was the original one of July 13, 1927, and the present appeal was not taken within three months from that time, as required by statute; that an order for reargument does not stay the running of the statutory period: Barlott v. Forney, 187 Pa. 301, 303; Henry's Est., 290 Pa. 537.

Appellee's motion must be sustained, but not on the grounds stated by him. It is obvious that neither order entered by the court below is a final one; to make either of these orders final, it would have to be followed by some such words as "and judgment is now entered for defendant": Smith v. Phila. Reading Ry., 286 Pa. 55, 56. An appeal cannot be taken until after a final judgment has been entered in the case (American Trust Co. v. Kaufman, 279 Pa. 230, 233); upon the entry of such a judgment, plaintiff's right to appeal will arise.

The present appeal is quashed.


Summaries of

Leibfried et al. v. Horn

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Oct 27, 1928
143 A. 786 (Pa. 1928)

In Leibfried v. Horn, 294 Pa. 137, 138, 143 A. 786, the orders were in this form: "It is adjudged that plaintiffs have not set out a good cause of action," and "after reargument we adhere to our opinion that the statement filed does not set out a good cause of action.

Summary of this case from McClelland v. West Penn Apl. Co.
Case details for

Leibfried et al. v. Horn

Case Details

Full title:Leibfried et al. v. Horn

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Oct 27, 1928

Citations

143 A. 786 (Pa. 1928)
143 A. 786

Citing Cases

United Security Title Insurance v. Moskowitz

The defendant, Moskowitz, filed an affidavit of defense raising a question of law, under the provisions of…

Trestrail v. Johnson

As recently said by us in Watkins v. Neff, 287 Pa. 202, 204, "The order __________ does not enter a judgment;…