Legal Opinion

Boron v. Smith

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 4, 1955No. Appeal, 337PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mb. Justice Jones,

The questions of law raised on this appeal are both procedural and substantive. Logically, we shall treat first with the matter of procedure. However, a recital of material facts is essential to an understanding of all of the problems presented.

Joseph M. Boron, the plaintiff, became the lessee of certain coal lands of the defendants under written lease executed on January 7, 1942, for a term of ten years. The lease conferred on the lessee the right to mine and remove the coal at either of two fixed royalty prices (depending upon whether the coal was mined by the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Smith v. Glen Alden Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  2. Shenandoah Borough v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  3. Denniston v. HaddockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
  4. Estate of LazarusPennsylvania Orphans' Court, Luzerne County · 1892
  5. Robinson v. PierceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Bensalem Township School District v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  2. Schuster v. Pennsylvania Turnpike CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  3. Shoup v. ShoupSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  4. Hummel v. McFaddenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  5. Tamko Asphalt Products, Inc. v. FenixMissouri Court of Appeals · 1959

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API