Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

PITTSBURGH NATIONAL BANK v. KEMILWORTH RESTAURANT COMPANY (12/12/63)

December 12, 1963

PITTSBURGH NATIONAL BANK, TO USE, APPELLANT,
v.
KEMILWORTH RESTAURANT COMPANY, INC., APPELLANT.



Appeal, No. 188, April T., 1963, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Oct. T., 1961, No. 1562, in case of Pittsburgh National Bank, to use, v. Kemilworth Restaurant Company, Inc. et al. Order affirmed.

COUNSEL

A. Z. Lefkowitz, with him David Roth, and Kaplan, Finkel and Roth, for appellant.

David F. Alpern, with him J. Benjamin Alpern, and Samuel N. Goldman, for appellee.

Before Rhodes, P.j., Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ.

Author: Montgomery

[ 202 Pa. Super. Page 240]

OPINION BY MONTGOMERY, J.

This is an appeal from an order opening a judgment entered by confession on a note dated August 30, 1960, drawn in favor of the appellant, Roth Rug and Carpet Company, as payee, signed as follows:

"Kemilworth Restaurant Company, Inc.

Homer H. Dasey (Seal) Laura W. Dasey (Seal)"

The note was negotiated to a third party, the Pittsburgh National Bank (Bank) which caused judgment to be entered thereon against both the corporation and Laura W. Dasey, individually (Homer H. Dasey having died previously). Subsequently, the note and judgment were reassigned to the original payee (Roth), which presently contends that both the corporation and Laura W. Dasey are liable to it.

The effect of Mrs. Dasey's signature on he note is the issue before us. She was secretary of the corporation but did not personally participate in the transaction out of which the delivery of the note arose, viz., a sale of carpeting by Roth for use by the corporation in the dining room of the restaurant it was operating.

Mrs. Dasey contends that her signature was affixed in a representative capacity but through accident and mistake or inadvertence that fact was not shown on the note.

Roth contends that Mrs. Dasey signed individually and that her signature and that of her husband, in their capacities as officers of the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.