Hay v. Martin
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error, No. 216, Jan. T., 1888, to C. P. Somerset Co., to review a judgment on a verdict for plaintiffs, in an action of ejectment by James B. Martin and Mary A. Martin, his wife, in right of the wife, against Peter S. Hay, at Sept. T., 1885, No. 185. TRUNKEYand Clark, JJ., absent. The writ, issued July 3, 1885, claimed to recover the land in dispute. The defendant pleaded not guilty.
Read the full summary
Error, No. 216, Jan. T., 1888, to C. P. Somerset Co., to review a judgment on a verdict for plaintiffs, in an action of ejectment by James B. Martin and Mary A. Martin, his wife, in right of the wife, against Peter S. Hay, at Sept. T., 1885, No. 185. TRUNKEYand Clark, JJ., absent. The writ, issued July 3, 1885, claimed to recover the land in dispute. The defendant pleaded not guilty. At the trial, it was admitted that the title to the premises in dispute was, on June 21, 1879, vested in the school district of Elk-lick township. Plaintiff then offered in evidence deed dated Jan. 3, 1880, from…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
A thorough examination of this case satisfies us that it was well and carefully tried in the court below. The charge contains a full and complete exposition of the law relating to the resulting trust upon which the plaintiff depended for a verdict; the points were properly answered, and the facts clearly and impartially submitted to the jury, so that nothing is left for us but to affirm the judgment.
The judgment is affirmed.
The following should be added to the syllabi in the abo^e case:
A deed may operate as a written acknowledgment of trust, within the terms of the Act of April 22,…
2Cited by4 opinions
- First National Bank of Mesa v. ReevesArizona Supreme Court · 1925
- Culver v. GrahamWyoming Supreme Court · 1889
- Greene v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1869
- Champlin v. BakewellSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1869