Lytle v. Rupert
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 227, Oct. T., 1910, by defendant, from order of C. P. Huntingdon Co., May T., 1907, No. 27, overruling exceptions to auditor’s report in case of W. S. Lytle v. John H. Rupert. Exceptions to auditor’s report. The record showed the following decree: And now, September 3, 1910, the exceptions to the auditor’s report are overruled and the report is confirmed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 227, Oct. T., 1910, by defendant, from order of C. P. Huntingdon Co., May T., 1907, No. 27, overruling exceptions to auditor’s report in case of W. S. Lytle v. John H. Rupert. Exceptions to auditor’s report. The record showed the following decree: And now, September 3, 1910, the exceptions to the auditor’s report are overruled and the report is confirmed. And now September 20, 1910, on motion of Samuel I. Spyker, Esq., attorney for supervisors and Rupert, tax collector, an exception is granted to the foregoing decree and bill sealed. • Errors assigned were in the following form:…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
This case came into the court below by appeal of a resident taxpayer from the audit of the accounts of township auditors for the year ending March 6, 1909. Upon application of counsel for both parties, the court framed an issue for the determination of several questions, and amongst them, whether John H. Rupert, tax collector, should be surcharged with the sum of about $160, or any part thereof, and directed the case to be tried without further pleadings. Subsequently, the court referred the case to an auditor "to determine the matters involved and make a report to the court.” This…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Dunmore Borough School District v. WahlersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Feingold v. KatzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Mifflin Township Poor District v. Schuylkill County Poor DistrictSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Berks County v. LindermanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Devlin's CaseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
3Cited by1 opinion
- Kelly v. KellySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912