Citation Numbers: 16 A.2d 153, 142 Pa. Super. 266
Judges: PER CURIAM, November 13, 1940:
Filed Date: 10/7/1940
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 1/13/2023
Argued October 7, 1940.
We need not now decide the interesting question discussed by the appellant, as to whether the reason given by the court below for dissolving the foreign attachment was sound or not; for whether or not, in the circumstances of this case, the plaintiff was justified in joining the principal and the agent as joint defendants in the writ, we are required to sustain the order of the court by the very recent decision of the Supreme Court inMagel v. Springs,
The averments in the affidavit of cause of action in the present case are not materially different. They did not aver that the defendants, or either of them, were not residents of Pennsylvania. Averments that they reside in a city in some other state or country and that *Page 268
they have no place of business, office or agent in this state are not incompatible with a residence also in this state: Magel v.Springs, supra; Kohl v. Lyons,
Order affirmed.