TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Hutchinson's Appeal

Esther Hutchinson's Appeal

Hutchinson's Appeal, 92 Pa. 186 (1879)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · State Highest Courts
Decided
November 28, 1879
Judges
Gordon, Green, Mercur, Paxson, Sharswood, Sterrett, Trunkey
Citations
92 Pa. 1861879 Pa. LEXIS 397
Headnotes
1. The omission of the middle letter in a name in the judgment-index is fatal to a lien. 2. There can be no distinction between purchasers and subsequent judgment-creditors. The latter must be presumed to have searched for prior liens before giving credit to the defendant, and whether they did or did not, the rule which requires the judgment-index to give accurate information cannot be departed from. It is always the duty of the plaintiff to see that his judgment is correctly entered on the index. 3. Wood v. Reynolds, 7 W. & S. 406, followed.
Summary
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Butler county: of October and November Term 1878, No. 91. Appeal of Esther Hutchinson from the decree of the court overruling her exceptions to the report of the auditor to distribute the fund arising from the sheriff’s sale of the real estate of W. A. Black. Rev. William A. Black and M. H. Black., his wife, on the 2Sd of August 1875, made their joint judgment-note to Esther Hutchinson for $717, due in one year. On the same day judgment was entered on this note in Butler county, at October Term 1875, but by mistake the middle initial “ A ” was omitted and the letter “ G ” inserted in its place, and the judgment was entered as against “ W. G. Black.” At the time this judgment was entered, judgments were entered against W. A. Black, which, at the time of the sale of his real estate, amounted to about $2400. Mr. Black’s real estate was sold by the sheriff of Butler county on October 1st 1877, to Mrs. Hutchinson for $4600. Several judgments were entered subsequent to Mrs. Hutchinson’s, more in all than the fund realized by the sheriff on the sale of the land. All the judgments, except Mrs. Hutchinson’s, were entered against W. A. Black. An auditor was appointed to make distribution, and after a hearing of the matter made a report, allowed no part of the fund to be applied to the payment of Mrs. Hutchinson’s judgment, and gave as a reason that the_ judgment was entered against W. G. Black and not against W. Á. Black. Mrs. Hutchinson excepted to the report, but the court, Bredin,. P. J., overruled her exceptions and confirmed the report. From this decree this appeal was taken.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

The judgment of the Supreme Court was entered Nov. 28th 1879, Per Curiam.

This case is ruled by Wood v. Reynolds, 7 W. & S. 406 . It was there held that the omission of the middle letter of a name in the judgment-index was fatal to the lien. “It is certain,” say the court, “that an initial, standing with a name of baptism, is no part of it in pleading; but it follows not that an omission of it is to be disregarded as an index of notice to purchasers.” There can beAistinction between purchasers and subsequent judgment-creditors. The latter must be presumed to have searched for prior liens before giving credit to the defendant, and whether they did or not, the rule which requires the judgment-index to give accurate information cannot be departed from without great danger. It is always the duty of the plaintiff to see that his judgment is correctly entered on the index.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at the costs of the appellant.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1891: 11900: 11915: 11931: 21933: 11939: 21950: 118912026peak 1931 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Crouse v. Murphy21 A. 358 (Pa. 1891)
  2. Coral Gables, Inc. v. Kerl6 A.2d 275 (Pa. 1939)
  3. Arch Street Building & Loan Assn. v. Sook158 A. 595 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1931)
  4. Butts v. Cruttenden14 Pa. Super. 449 (1900)
  5. Turk v. Benson152 N.W. 354 (N.D. 1915)
  6. Everett Bank v. Hall10 A.2d 115 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1939)

Most recent

  1. Coyle Lumber Co. v. Heberlig71 Pa. D. & C. 117 (1950)
  2. Everett Bank v. Hall10 A.2d 115 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1939)
  3. Coral Gables, Inc. v. Kerl6 A.2d 275 (Pa. 1939)
  4. Citizens National Bank & Trust Co. v. First National Bank20 Pa. D. & C. 349 (1933)
  5. Arch Street Building & Loan Assn. v. Sook158 A. 595 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1931)
  6. Arch Street Building & Loan Ass'n v. Sook14 Pa. D. & C. 794 (1931)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Wood v. Reynolds, 7 Watts & Serg. 406 (1844) 22

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list