History
  • No items yet
midpage
Klopfer v. Ekis
155 Pa. 41
Pa.
1893
Check Treatment
Pkk Curiam,

In Jenkintown National Bank’s Appeal, 124 Pa. 345, it was said by this court: “ It is difficult to lay down the precise measure of proof which should move a chancellor to open a judgment. That he may not act unless there is more than oath against oath is a familiar rule in chancery practice. When there is more than this, and it comes to the question of the weight of the evidence, it is for him to decide to which side the *43scales incline. If lie is in doubt upon this question, or as to the credibility of the witnesses, a prudent course would suggest the aid of a jury. This rule provides a reasonable margin for the exercise of the discretion of the court below, which this court will hesitate to interfere with.”

This rule was adopted after a careful consideration as a guide to the common pleas judges in applications of this kind. We think the action of the learned judge below comes within the reasonable margin there referred to. His order opening the judgment is

Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Klopfer v. Ekis
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Date Published: Jan 3, 1893
Citation: 155 Pa. 41
Docket Number: Appeals, Nos. 178 and 274
Court Abbreviation: Pa.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.