Legal Opinion

Baker v. Geist

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 1, 1974No. Appeal, 38PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Manderino,

The appellant, Harold S. Baker, brought an action under the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act, Act of May 21,1921, P. L. 1045, No. 379, §§1-13, 39 P.S. §§351-63, seeking to set aside certain conveyances made by the appellee Minnie E. Geist, to her niece, appellee Hannah M. Tussey. The trial court refused to set aside the conveyances and this appeal followed.

The appellant and appellee Geist were involved in an automobile collision on September 21, 1968. Be tween September 4, 1969, and October 16, 1969, tbe appellant’s attorney sent two letters to appellee Geist…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. First National Bank v. HoffinesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  2. Farmers T. Co. of Lanc. v. BevisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. United States v. Gleneagles Investment Co.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Stauffer v. StaufferSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  3. Moody v. Security Pacific Business Credit, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
  4. Joshua Slocum, Ltd. v. Boyle (In Re Joshua Slocum, Ltd.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1989
  5. Schaps v. Just Enough Corp. (In Re Pinto Trucking Service, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1988

30 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