Doran v. Piper
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 251, Oct. T., 1894, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Cambria Co., Sept. T., 1898, No. 262, on verdict for defendants. Ejectment. Before Barker, P. J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 251, Oct. T., 1894, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Cambria Co., Sept. T., 1898, No. 262, on verdict for defendants. Ejectment. Before Barker, P. J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. The court, under objection and exception, admitted in evidence the deed under which defendants claimed. [4] The court charged in effect that there was no burden on defendants to show that the land was sold to pay debts, and, as no evidence was offered on the subject, gave binding instructions in favor of defendants. [1-8] Verdict for defendant. A motion for a new trial was…
1Opinion of the Court
Pkr Curiam,
This action of ejectment was brought in the right of Mary Doran, nee Sharp,—one of the residuary devisees under the will of her father, Richard Sharp, who died testate in 1863, leaving to survive him a widow and nine children, of whom she was one,—to recover possession of the one undivided ninth part of the two hundred and ten acre tract of land described in the precipe. She claimed as one of the nine children, residuary devisees referred to in her father’s will. ■ The defendants claimed under the deed of testator’s widow and executrix, executed under the power of sale given her by…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Davidson, Exrx. v. BrightSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Eisenbrown v. BurnsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Schenck v. ClydeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
- Keeley v. Moon, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Bucks County1934