Commonwealth v. Cummings
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 91, Oct. T., 1910, by T. J. Cummings, from judgment of Q. S. Schuylkill Co., Sept. T., 1910, No. 1,199, on verdict of guilty in case of Commonwealth v. T. J. Cummings. Indictment for making of false election return. Before Brumm, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned among others was in refusing to withdraw a juror called.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Orlady, J.,
The first nineteen assignments of error so flagrantly ignore the rules of this court that we cannot condone such a procedure by considering them. In none of these assignments is there a statement of the offer, the objection made, or ruling of the court, or the evidence admitted.
Rule 14 requires that “Each error relied on must be separately assigned, and by itself. If any assignment em*213brace more than one point, or refer to more than one bill of exceptions, or raise more than one distinct question, it shall be considered a waiver of all the errors so alleged.” Where our…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Alexander v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
- Sopherstein v. BertelsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Commonwealth v. HazlettSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Gish v. BrownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Henning v. KeiperSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Com. v. MetzSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Commonwealth v. ShapiroSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913