Legal Opinion

Palethorp v. Palethorp

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 13, 1895No. Appeal, No. 204PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal, No. 204, Jan. T., 1895, by defendants, from decree of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., June T., 1894, No. 1702, awarding partition. Bill in equity for partition. From the bill and answer it appeared that John H. Palethorp died in 1861, leaving to survive him a widow, Angelina Palethorp, and seven children, one of whom was Edward J. Palethorp.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 204, Jan. T., 1895, by defendants, from decree of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., June T., 1894, No. 1702, awarding partition. Bill in equity for partition. From the bill and answer it appeared that John H. Palethorp died in 1861, leaving to survive him a widow, Angelina Palethorp, and seven children, one of whom was Edward J. Palethorp. The widow, Angelina Palethorp, died without remarrying in July, 1877. Edward J. Palethorp died on July 1, 1893. 'intestate, without issue, leaving a widow, the complainant, surviving. At the time the bill was filed, proceedings to distribute the personal…

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

While we do not regard the decree appealed from in this *105case as a final decree, we are very clear that the common pleas has jurisdiction of the case and the parties. That court now possesses all the power of a court of equity in partition cases. We cannot now discuss the merits of the controversy, but we are of opinion that the plaintiff’s interest is sufficient to sustain a bill and that the rights of all the parties can be determined in the subsequent proceedings.

Decree affirmed.

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Carey v. SchallerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
  2. McCloskey v. Chautauqua Lake Ice Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896

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

Powered by the Exa API