Moore v. Bischoff
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 127, Oct. T., 1903, by Anna Bischoff, from order of C. P. No. 4, Phila. Co., June T., 1900, No. 385, dismissing exceptions to auditor’s report, in case of J. Clarke Moore to use of Leon H. Folz v. Carl Bischoff et al. Exceptions to auditor’s report. The opinion of the Superior Court states the case. Error assigned was quoted in the opinion of the Superior Court.
1Opinion of the Court
Per. Curiam,
This is an appeal from a decree overruling exceptions to and confirming the report of an auditor appointed to distribute a fund produced by a sheriff’s sale of personalty. It is urged by appellee’s counsel that the appellant has not conformed to our rules and we are asked to dismiss the appeal upon that ground. The objection is well taken. Rule 27 provides that immediately following the auditor’s report the exceptions thereto shall be printed, these to be followed by the decree, this by the assignments of error and these by the argument, in the order stated. Not only was this…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bull's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1855
- Estate of GallowaySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Frank's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
3Cited by1 opinion
- Klees's EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916