Commonwealth v. Harrold
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 55, Oct. T., 1902, by Sarah A. Harrold et. al., from order of G. P. Westmoreland County, Nov. T., 1900, No. 488, dismissing exceptions to the inquisition of lunacy, and refusing a new trial on the traverse of the inquisition, in case of Commonwealth ex rel. Jane E. Cope v. Sarah A. Harrold. Traverse of inquisition of lunacy.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 55, Oct. T., 1902, by Sarah A. Harrold et. al., from order of G. P. Westmoreland County, Nov. T., 1900, No. 488, dismissing exceptions to the inquisition of lunacy, and refusing a new trial on the traverse of the inquisition, in case of Commonwealth ex rel. Jane E. Cope v. Sarah A. Harrold. Traverse of inquisition of lunacy. From the record it appeared that the following exceptions were filed to the inquisition: That the said finding is not in accordance with the testimony and the law governing the same; that there is no testimony in the ease to prove the defendant to be of…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Mitchell,
It was held in In re Weaver, 116 Pa. 225, that there is no provision for bringing the evidence taken upon an inquisition of lunacy upon the record, by bill of exception or otherwise, *157and therefore no power of review on the merits, either in the common pleas or in this court. The party aggrieved by the finding of the inquisition must pursue his remedy in the statutory way, by traverse. That was done in the present case, but the assignments of error, with one exception, are to matters occurring at the inquisition. It is quite true that on the principles of Ex…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Commonwealth v. BeaumontSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
- In re WeaverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1887
- McGinnis v. Commonwealth ex rel. McGinnisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1874
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bullitt's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913