Browning v. McManus
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court for the City and County of Philadelphia, to remove the record of an actipn, therein Catharine McManus was plaintiff, and William B.rowning was defendant. It appeared, by the record returned in this case, that on the 2d of January, 1.835, the case was referred, under the act of 1705, to Messrs. Coleman Fisher, Mordecai D. Lewis, and William S. Torr. The next entry on the record is as follows: “ March 6th.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court for the City and County of Philadelphia, to remove the record of an actipn, therein Catharine McManus was plaintiff, and William B.rowning was defendant. It appeared, by the record returned in this case, that on the 2d of January, 1.835, the case was referred, under the act of 1705, to Messrs. Coleman Fisher, Mordecai D. Lewis, and William S. Torr. The next entry on the record is as follows: “ March 6th. Coleman Fisher having declined to serve, Henry Manly was appointed referee ; in whose place, he being unable to attend on account of indisposition, John Elliott…
1Per curiam
The exceptions are such as might be proper in the .court below, op a motion to set aside the award; which is put, by the act of 1705, on the footing of a verdict; but they are not in place here. We are incompetent, for instance, to enquire whether the arbitrators were sworn, or the opposite party had notice; but these, being .extrinsic to the- record, were open to examination in the court below, by affidavit. The exception to the substitution has colour of foundation, but no more. The substituted arbitrator appears to have been appointed precisely as the others were. The minutes are unusually…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Shisler v. KeavySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1874
- Finch v. LambertonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Rogers v. PlayfordSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1849
- Henneigh v. KramerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1865