TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Security Title & Trust Co. v. Schriver

The Security Title & Trust Company, Receiver of The York Mutual Building & Loan Association v. D. A. Schriver, and Allen H. Pflieger and D. A. Schriver trading as Schriver & Pflieger and D. Schriver and Allen H. Pflieger

Sec. Title & Trust Co. v. Schriver, 40 A. 1134 (Pa. 1898)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 16, 1898
Docket
Nos. , No. 55
Judges
Chiee, Dean, Fell, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Sterrett, Williams
Citations
40 A. 1134186 Pa. 1601898 Pa. LEXIS 972
Disposition
Reversed.
Summary
Appeal, No. 55, Jan. T., 1897, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. York Co., Aug. T., 1896, No. 75, on case stated. Fell, J., dissents.

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

Opinion of the Court — Chieesterrett

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

Opinion by Mr. Chiee Justice Sterrett,

This appeal was argued with York Trust, Real Estate and Deposit Co., Receiver, etc., versus John D. Gallatin, appellant, No. 56 of January term, 1897, and involves substantially the same questions that have been considered and disposed of in an opinion just filed in that case, ante, p. 150. This case, as was that, is a “ case stated,” for the opinion of the court, in which all the facts necessarily appear of record. , The material questions in both cases being substantially the same, it is unnecessary to do more than refer to the opinion in the other case. For reasons there given, we think the learned court below erred in entering the judgment complained of; and both assignments of error should therefore be sustained.

Judgment reversed and judgment now entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant, for 198.58 with interest from January 22, 1896, in accordance with the first proposition in the case stated.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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