Legal Opinion

Hechelman v. Geyer

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 3, 1916No. Appeals, No. 8 and 215PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeals, No. 8 and 215, Oct. T., 1915, by James D. Callery and defendants, from decree of O. P. Allegheny Co., April Term, 1914, No. 562, in equity, in case of Herman W. Hechelman v. Charles Geyer, Joseph Stybr and Morris Einstein, and the-Pennsylvania Light and Power Company, a corporation. Bill in equity to declare a trust and for an accounting.

Read the full summary

Appeals, No. 8 and 215, Oct. T., 1915, by James D. Callery and defendants, from decree of O. P. Allegheny Co., April Term, 1914, No. 562, in equity, in case of Herman W. Hechelman v. Charles Geyer, Joseph Stybr and Morris Einstein, and the-Pennsylvania Light and Power Company, a corporation. Bill in equity to declare a trust and for an accounting. The facts appear in Provident Trust Co. v. Geyer, 248 Pa. 423, and in the following opinion by Swearingen, J., filed May 18, 1915: The fund in controversy is money in the hands of Charles Geyer, Joseph H. Stybr and Morris Einstein, which they hold…

1Opinion of the Court

Pee Cueiam,

These two appeals were heard together and both are dismissed with costs to the appellees on the opinions of the court below filed May 18,1915, and June 18,1915.

Appeals dismissed.

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Keenan v. EshlemanSupreme Court of Delaware · 1938
  2. Evans v. Diamond Alkali Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  3. Wilderman v. WildermanCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1974
  4. Land Title Bank & Trust Co. v. Lemle, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1938
  5. Price v. Creole Petroleum Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API