Blume v. Hartman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas No. 2, of Allegheny county: Of October Term 1886, No. 233. This was an issue wherein Frederick Blume was plaintiff and Amanda Virginia Hartman, Theodore W. Hartman her husband, George W. McClure administrator of Charlotte Matilda McClure, deceased, and Emmett McClure, guardian of Charlotte Blume McClure, George Miller McClure and Mary McClure were defendants.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas No. 2, of Allegheny county: Of October Term 1886, No. 233. This was an issue wherein Frederick Blume was plaintiff and Amanda Virginia Hartman, Theodore W. Hartman her husband, George W. McClure administrator of Charlotte Matilda McClure, deceased, and Emmett McClure, guardian of Charlotte Blume McClure, George Miller McClure and Mary McClure were defendants. The Orphans’ Court of Allegheny county directed its precept with the will of Charlotte Blume annexed to the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny county commanding an issue to be formed to try the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Green
There is no merit in the first assignment of error. We‘ have frequently held that the action of the court below in giving the conclusion of the argument to counsel for one side or*37tbe other is not reviewable on error. But here the main, burthen of the case rested with the contestants to the conclusion of the contest. It was for them to satisfy the jury as to the truth of their allegations, and there was, therefore, propriety in awarding to their counsel the right to begin and conclude the final argument to the jury. What was said by the court below in regard to the shifting of the burthen-of…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Phillips' EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- In Re Estate of ClarkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Cohen WillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
- Mendenhall v. MendenhallSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- White's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.