Legal Opinion

Gray v. Camac

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 20, 1931No. Appeal, 242PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

Defendant resists the bill in this case on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the court below. The appeal is from the order overruling defendant’s objections.

Willard A. Gray, plaintiff, in his bill avers that he and defendant’s decedent, John W. Camac, had for a number of years been associated together as copartners in a real estate business, plaintiff conducting the affairs of the partnership in the City of Philadelphia, and Ca-mac those arising in the State of Florida. Camac died in September, 1929, leaving a will naming his wife, Sallie R. Camac, as executrix. Letters…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Skelton v. Lower Merion TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  2. Staryeu v. MidouhasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Zerbe Township School District v. ThomasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  2. Welser v. EalerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  3. Nippon Ki-Ito Kaisha, Ltd. v. Ewing-Thomas Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  4. Thomas v. ThomasSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  5. Heffernan's AppealSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936

3 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