Legal Opinion

Silverman v. Bell Savings & Loan Ass'n

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 2, 1987No. 3054PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WIEAND, Judge:

The principal contention made in this appeal is that the post-trial court erred when it changed the findings of the chancellor who had determined that a real estate transaction should be rescinded because of fraud. We are constrained to agree that appellant’s contention is well taken; and, therefore, we reverse.

A review of the facts is essential to an understanding of the issues. In or about March, 1982, Bell Savings & Loan Association acquired title via mortgage foreclosure to premises known as 863 Township Line in Abington Township, Montgomery County. Bell listed the premises…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Delahanty v. First Pennsylvania Bank, N.A.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  2. Frowen v. BlankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  3. BAKER v. RANGOSSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  4. Scaife Co. v. Rockwell-Standard Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  5. Neuman v. Corn Exchange National Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Umbelina v. AdamsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
  2. Skurnowicz v. LucciSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  3. John N. Wittekamp v. Gulf & Western, Inc. Gulf & Western Industries, Inc. Gulf & Western Manufacturing Co. And Wickes Manufacturing John N. WittekampCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
  4. Toy v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  5. Eigen v. Textron Lycoming Reciprocating Engine DivisionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API