Legal Opinion

Rarry Et Ux. v. Shimek Et Ux.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 29, 1948No. Appeal, 163PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Horace Stern,

In this action, which involves rival claims to the ownership of a house, there is no dispute between the parties as to the applicable principles of law. The only question is whether defendants have produced evidence sufficient in quantity and quality to support.their alleged title.

The suit is in ejectment. Arthur C. Riffle, prior to his death in 1947, was the owner, of a farm in Monongahela Township, Greene County, and a small tract of 2% acres immediately Adjoining it in Cumberland :Townsbip. In. 1925 Robert. Sbimek, .defendant,- then ,a lad .ten years of…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Rader v. KeiperSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  2. Moffitt v. MoffittSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  3. Glass v. TremellenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  4. Sorber v. MastersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
  5. Ackerman v. FisherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Zvonik v. ZvonikSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. Fichera v. GordingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  3. Tozier v. TozierSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1981
  4. Yarnall EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  5. Fuisz v. FuiszSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991

13 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