DocketNumber: Appeal, No. 103
Citation Numbers: 58 Pa. Super. 454
Judges: Head, Henderson, Kephart, Orlady, Porter, Rice, Trbxleb, Trexler
Filed Date: 10/12/1914
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 2/18/2022
Opinion by
The court below, upon a petition being presented alleging that the name of the subscribing witness to a promissory note was affixed after the execution of the note and without the knowledge and consent of the makers, opened the judgment which had been entered by virtue of a warrant of attorney contained in the note and granted an issue to determine the facts in dispute. The depositions taken show that there is great doubt as to the time when the name of the subscribing witness was affixed and as to whether the name was affixed with the knowledge and consent of the makers.
Mary Whitmer, the petitioner, one of the makers of the note, testified that the signature of the subscribing witness was not on the note when she and her joint obligor, Fulmer, signed it. In this statement she was corroborated by Fulmer. The subscribing witness and the payee of the note contradicted her and alleged that when Fulmer affixed his name to the note he handed the pen to the wife of the payee, and she with the same pen signed as subscribing witness. The note itself upon examination by the court showed that the name of the subscribing witness and that of Fulmer, appeared to have been written with inks differing in color. In the
A careful reading of the testimony submitted leads us' to the conclusion that the court below was justified in granting the issue.
Judgment affirmed.