Legal Opinion

Fischer v. Hunsberger

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 19, 1941No. Appeal, 259PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Kenworthey, J.,

In this action of ejectment the yerdict was for plain tiffs. Defendant has appealed from the refusal of her motions for new trial and judgment n. o. v. The following sketch offered in evidence by appellees will assist in clarifying the issues:

* This is a free-hand copy drawn from appellees' exhibit No. 17.

The land in controversy consists of the narrow lane or roadway between tracts No. 1 and No. 2 of the property of appellant, the successor in title to Sarah King. Appellees, successors in title to Jacob Funk, claimed title to the lane subject merely to appellant's…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Nanty-Glo Boro. v. American Surety Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  2. Parks v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  3. Bosler v. Sun Oil CompanySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  4. Boyer v. CampbellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  5. Tillmes v. MarshSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Fischer v. HunsbergerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API