Sperry & Hutchinson Co. v. McKelvey Hughes Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeals, Nos. 35, 36, 37, 38 and 39, April T., 1915, by defendants, from decree .of C. P. Allegheny Co., No. 393, First Term, 1908, In Equity, in attachment for contempt in case of The Sperry & Hutchinson Company v. McKelvey Hughes Company, et al. Petition for attachment for contempt. Before Swearingen, J; The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was decree awarding the attachment. .
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Kephart, J.,
This is an appeal from an order of the court in an attachment for contempt. The proceeding before us is in the nature of a certiorari and as such must be governed by the rules controlling such appeals. The only question which can properly be raised is whether the court below exceeded its jurisdiction in holding the petitioner for a contempt and in imposing on him a fine therefor. We do not revise the case upon its merits. Every fact found by the court below is taken to be true and every intendment is to be made in favor of their record if it appears that they proceeded…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- In Re LennonSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Joseph R. Foard Co. v. Maryland ex rel. GoralskiCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1914
- John D. Park & Sons Co. v. HartmanCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1907
- Locker v. . American Tobacco CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
- Sperry & Hutchinson Co. v. Louis Weber & Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1908
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Walling v. James v. Reuter, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Di Giacomo v. HestonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Messmore's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Brightbill v. Rigo, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- In Re Donald MacDonaldSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.