
    Commercial Motors Mortgage Corp., Appellant, v. Stephenson.
    
      Appeals — Refusal of judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense — Manifest error.
    
    An order refusing judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense will never be reversed unless plain error appears.
    Argued April 12,1922.
    Appeal, No. 256, Jan. T., 1922, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Luzerne Co., Jan. T., 1921, No. 391, discharging rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, in case of Commercial Motors Mortgage Corporation v. N. R. Stephenson.
    Before Moschzisker, C. J., Frazer, Simpson, Kephart and Schaefer, JJ.
    Affirmed.
    Rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense. Before Fuller, -P. J.
    
      The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.
    Rule discharged. Plaintiff appealed.
    
      Error assigned was order, quoting record.
    
      James P. Harris, of Knapp, O’Malley, Hitt é Harris, for appellant.
    
      A. A. Vosburg and John H. Dando, for appellee,
    were not heard.
    May 8, 1922:
   Per Curiam,

This is an action of replevin to recover a motor truck in possession of defendant, title to which is claimed by plaintiff; a bailment lease and default thereunder, by failure of defendant to make required payments, are alleged; the latter undertook to deny the lease and, in its pleading, specifically averred full payment of the purchase price of the truck; the court below refused judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense, and plaintiff appealed. Such appeals are never sustained unless plain error appears, and this cannot be found in the present case.

The order is affirmed.  