Legal Opinion

Hoyt's Estate

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 23, 1911No. Appeal, No. 100PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal, No. 100, Jan. T., 1911, by Wm. T. S. Hoyt, Dora Hafer et al., devisees, etc., from decree of O. C. Clearfield Co., No. 3,250, referring report back to auditor, in Estate of Milo Hoyt, deceased. Exceptions to report of Hazard A. Murray, Esq., auditor. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the case. The court sustained certain of the exceptions and referred the report back to the auditor to make .distribution in accordance with the opinion.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 100, Jan. T., 1911, by Wm. T. S. Hoyt, Dora Hafer et al., devisees, etc., from decree of O. C. Clearfield Co., No. 3,250, referring report back to auditor, in Estate of Milo Hoyt, deceased. Exceptions to report of Hazard A. Murray, Esq., auditor. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the case. The court sustained certain of the exceptions and referred the report back to the auditor to make .distribution in accordance with the opinion. Error assigned was decree of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

This appeal is from a decree referring the report of an auditor back to him with direction that he make distribution in accordance with the opinion of the court sustaining two exceptions to it. This was but an interlocutory order. There can be no final decree until the schedule of distribution reported by the auditor has been absolutely confirmed by the court.

Appeal quashed.

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Levy's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  2. Monnia's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  3. Graham's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  4. Kaeir's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
  5. Taheny's EstatePennsylvania Orphans' Court, Philadelphia County · 1942