Wolf v. Ferguson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
APPEAL BY S. C. HOLLAR EROM THE COURT OE COMMON PLEAS OE ERANKLIN COUNTY. No. 15 May Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below. No. 47 December Term 1887, E. D., C. P. On October 22, 1887, tbe sheriff of Franklin county, by virtue of two writs of execution in his hands, sold certain parcels of real estate belonging to William H. Ferguson, and subsequently, to the number and term of the court below, above mentioned, paid into said court the net proceeds of the sales, aggregating…
Read the full summary
APPEAL BY S. C. HOLLAR EROM THE COURT OE COMMON PLEAS OE ERANKLIN COUNTY. No. 15 May Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below. No. 47 December Term 1887, E. D., C. P. On October 22, 1887, tbe sheriff of Franklin county, by virtue of two writs of execution in his hands, sold certain parcels of real estate belonging to William H. Ferguson, and subsequently, to the number and term of the court below, above mentioned, paid into said court the net proceeds of the sales, aggregating $1,679. On December 20, 1887, Mr. O. M. Dwnr can was appointed auditor to make distribution of the funds thus raised. On July…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee. Curiam :
This case has been so elaborately argued by the auditor and the court below, that we do not find it necessary to continue the discussion at length. The reasons given by the learned judge for awarding the sum of $286.22 to W. W. Britton, guardian, are entirely satisfactory. This disposes of the second assignment of error.
*288We desire to say in regard to the first, that it is exceedingly vague and unsatisfactory. To allege in general terms that “the court erred in confirming the report of the auditor,” is to give us no information whatever. In what respect, or for -what reason did it…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Donnan v. BarnesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922