Wentzel's Appeal
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 403, Jan. T., 1894, by-Samuel B. Wentzel, from order of C. P. Berks Co., Insolvent Docket, No. 243, refusing to discharge defendant, Samuel B. Wentzel, from custody. Petition for discharge under insolvent laws. From the paper-books it appeared that defendant was charged with embezzlement of funds received by him as guardian. Defendant presented his petition to be discharged under the insolvent laws.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 403, Jan. T., 1894, by-Samuel B. Wentzel, from order of C. P. Berks Co., Insolvent Docket, No. 243, refusing to discharge defendant, Samuel B. Wentzel, from custody. Petition for discharge under insolvent laws. From the paper-books it appeared that defendant was charged with embezzlement of funds received by him as guardian. Defendant presented his petition to be discharged under the insolvent laws. The court refused his petition, and remanded him for trial in the quarter sessions. The order was made on the Saturday before the June sessions of 1892 began. Defendant entered into a…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
By act of April 22, 1863, P. L. 531, the provisions of the act of March 31,1860, were extended so as to include guardians “ in the same manner as executors, administrators and assignees.” The later act therefore embraces the case of a fraudulent guardian ; but the duty of the common pleas, under the 133d section thereof, is not to discharge generally, but onl}- “from imprisonment.” It does not appear that appellant has as 3-et been imprisoned, and hence said section is inapplicable to his case.
Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed with costs to be paid by appellant.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Commonwealth v. KaufmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1899