Utley v. Cobb
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 37, March T., 1910, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Lackawanna Co., Sept. T., 1910, No. 1,464, quashing writ of ejectment in case of William Utley v. James A. Cobb. Rule to quash writ of ejectment. Newcomb, J., filed the following opinion: The regularity of the writ is attacked because it was issued more than six months after plaintiff had been ruled to bring his action.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 37, March T., 1910, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Lackawanna Co., Sept. T., 1910, No. 1,464, quashing writ of ejectment in case of William Utley v. James A. Cobb. Rule to quash writ of ejectment. Newcomb, J., filed the following opinion: The regularity of the writ is attacked because it was issued more than six months after plaintiff had been ruled to bring his action. That proceeding was had to No. 658 January Term, this year, and this should have been given the same number. The rule was taken under the Act of March 8, 1889, P. L. 10, as amended by that of April 16, 1903, P.…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
This is an appeal from an order making absolute a rule to show cause why a writ of ejectment should not be quashed. The appellant’s counsel raise no question as to the jurisdiction of the court to quash the writ, if the plaintiff was barred from maintaining the action by the proceeding under the Act of March 8, 1889, P. L. 10, as amended by the Act of April 16, *4871903, P. L. 212, or as to the propriety of raising the question of conclusiveness in this way.
They state the question involved as follows: “Does the court of common pleas have jurisdiction to extend the time within which…
2Cited by3 opinions
- In re Foster's PetitionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Foster's PetitionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Waters v. Crow, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Greene County1921