Legal Opinion

Wheatcroft v. SMITH

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 29, 1976No. Appeal, 1286PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Cercone, J.,

The instant appeal arises from the order of the lower court sustaining the garnishees’ preliminary objections and quashing plaintiffs writ of execution. The garnishees (the Tax Claim Bureau, the Treasurer and the Controller of Montgomery County) successfully raisecLthe doctrine of Custodia Legis in the lower court. We find that doctrine to have been misapplied and will reverse. The facts are as follows.

Plaintiff (appellant herein) purchased defendants’ land at a tax sale in 1969. Defendants subsequently brought suit to challenge the validity of the sale and refused to…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Central Contracting Co. v. C. E. Youngdahl & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  2. Bulkley v. EckertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1846
  3. Weicht v. Automobile Banking Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
  4. Commonwealth v. MooneySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  5. Ostroff v. YaslykSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Garden State Standardbred Sales Co. v. SeeseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  2. Buchholz v. CamSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  3. Marine National Bank v. Northwest Pennsylvania Bank & Trust Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Bianco v. Concepts" 100", Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. Commonwealth, Department of General Services v. Collingdale Millwork Co.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

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

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

Powered by the Exa API