Legal Opinion

Kyner v. Hockersmith

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 18, 1912No. Appeal No. 91PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal No. 91, Jan. T., 1912, by defendants from judgment of C. P. Franklin Co., Feb. T., 1912, No. 31, for plaintiff on case stated in suit of Clara J. Kyner v. S. B. Hockersmith et al. Case stated to determine marketable title to real estate. Before Gtllan, P. J. The court entered judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $11,876.51. Error assigned was the judgment of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

Qpinioñ by

Me. Justice Mosctiziskee,

This was a case stated in which the following facts were agreed upon: That James A. Beattie died seized of the farm in question, leaving a will by which he provided, inter alia, as follows: “I give and bequeath to my daughter Clara Jane Beattie the farm belonging to my estate, situated in Southampton township, Franklin *588county, Penna., containing 120 acres, more or less, to be held and enjoyed by ber after the death of my wife during her natural life, and at her death by the issue of her body, if such there be, forever. In the event of the death of my said…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Smith v. PiperSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
  2. Grimes v. ShirkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
  3. Walker v. VincentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1852
  4. Arnold v. Muhlenberg CollegeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
  5. Kleppner v. LavertySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. UNITED STATES v. 0.20 Acre of Land in New Alexandria Borough, Westmoreland CountyDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1947
  2. Pfeifle v. Bethlehem Public Library, Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Northampton County1928

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API