Legal Opinion

Slifer v. Greenmount Cemetery Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 23, 1949No. Appeal, 54PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Reno, J.,

The learned chancellor, affirmed by the court en banc, held a regulation of the cemetery company, requiring that lots be endowed for perpetual care as a condition precedent to the erection of monuments- thereon, invalid as to owners who purchased prior to the adoption of the regulation. From its decree enjoining , enforcement of the regulation against appellees, the company appealed. The decree will be affirmed.. •

Appellees are owners- of lots by devolution, and the deeds under which they hold are identical.. For the consideration of $168 the company by deed dated October…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. . ThorneNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  2. Anderson v. AchesonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
  3. Buffalo City Cemetery v. . City of BuffaloNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
  4. Brown v. HillIllinois Supreme Court · 1918
  5. Dwenger v. GearyIndiana Supreme Court · 1888

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Gingrich v. Blue Ridge Memorial GardensSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  2. Ignatowski v. St. Mary's Polish Catholic Cemetery Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  3. Essig EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  4. Janka v. Oakland Cemetery Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1954
  5. Moore v. Forest Lawn Gardens, Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1967

1 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