Knupp v. Barnard
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 191, Jan. T., 1902, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Warren Co., March T., 1901, No. 34, on verdict for defendants in case of W. J. Knupp v. Frank B. Barnard and E. Pequignot. Ejectment for land in Triumph township. Before Lindsey, P. J. The court charged in part as follows : [Now, gentlemen of the jury, the question which you are to determine is where this land is located.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 191, Jan. T., 1902, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Warren Co., March T., 1901, No. 34, on verdict for defendants in case of W. J. Knupp v. Frank B. Barnard and E. Pequignot. Ejectment for land in Triumph township. Before Lindsey, P. J. The court charged in part as follows : [Now, gentlemen of the jury, the question which you are to determine is where this land is located. The plaintiff claims that the Jacob Kortman tract and the Henry Bozar tract, and in fact all of these tracts should be located by what is known or termed in law a block survey. You will understand by this,…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The contention in this issue turned on conflicting evidence as to the location of two tracts of land, the Henry Bozar and Jacob Kortman warrants surveyed and returned in 1795. Both were part of a large block of seventy-six warrants taken out in that year by James Wilson; it is conceded on both sides that their position in the block is that of contiguous tracts having as a division an interior line of the block which on the return of survey, as defendants claim, is a line running from a post on the Allegheny river, the eastern boundary of the block west 522 rods to a white oak…
2Cases cited1 opinion
3Cited by2 opinions
- Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. Bravo Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- Goldsmith v. FillmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1907