Kaylor v. Shaffner

Decision Date01 January 1855
CitationKaylor v. Shaffner, 24 Pa. 489 (Pa. 1855)
PartiesKaylor versus Shaffner.
CourtPennsylvania Supreme Court

Alricks and Jordan, for plaintiff in error.

Mumma and Herr, for defendant in error.

The opinion of the Court was delivered by LEWIS, C. J.

Shaffner, the defendant in error, became the owner, by assignment, of a note originally given by one Epler to Barbara Bucks. After the death of the latter, Kaylor, her executor, obtained possession of the note and collected the money, without the consent of Shaffner, who thereupon brought this action for money had and received. The suit was originally brought in the name of "Barbara Bucks for the use of George Shaffner, assignee;" but a declaration was filed in the name of "George Shaffner, assignee of Barbara Bucks." Kaylor, without making any objections to the variance between the writ and the declaration, pleaded the general issue, and went to trial. The words "Assignee of Barbara Bucks," in the declaration, were surplusage. Rejecting them as immaterial, the declaration is in the name of the proper party, and the acceptance of it by pleading the general issue was a waiver of the objection to the manner in which the plaintiff's name was stated in the writ.

But the Court, on the trial, permitted an amendment so as to make the docket entry conform to the declaration. This was proper, and was only carrying out the agreement made by the parties when they joined issue on the declaration. It was perfectly right, independent of the Act of 4th May, 1852;...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
10 cases
  • Seymour v. Du Bois
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania
    • 18 Abril 1906
    ... ... matter of form, and as such amendable, is clear ... (Robertson v. Reed, 47 Pa. 115; Kaylor v ... Shaffner, 24 Pa. 489); and nonjoinder should be raised ... by a plea in abatement or demurrer; it cannot be raised by a ... plea in bar ... ...
  • Bausewine v. Norristown Herald, Inc.
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • 19 Marzo 1945
    ...the statutes] may be either of fact or law, and when it is made to appear, it is the duty of the court to correct it:" (citing Kaylor v. Shaffner, 24 Pa. 489). Here, Norristown Herald, Inc., was the master Strassburger, its servant. With the defendants in that relationship, it was a mistake......
  • United States v. Stuart
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania
    • 16 Agosto 1967
    ...the way lies open to it to present it." Accord Aiken, to Use of Mayberry v. Mayberry, 1937, 128 Pa.Super. 15, 193 A. 374. In Kaylor v. Shaffner, 1855, 24 Pa. 489, the court had before it a question concerning a statute, 12 P.S. § 533,6 which empowered the court in all cases of judgments ent......
  • Booth v. Dorsey
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Supreme Court
    • 28 Abril 1902
    ...should be allowed may be either of fact or law, and when it is made to appear, it is the duty of the court to correct it: Kaylor v. Shaffner, 24 Pa. 489. It apparent therefore that the plaintiff should have been permitted to file his amended statement. The nonsuit had eliminated the other p......
  • Get Started for Free