Knowlson v. Fleming
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 190, Oct. T., 1894,'by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. No. 2, Allegheny Co., July T., 1892, No. 385, dismissing bill in equity. Bill in equity to cancel deed. The case was referred to James S. Young, Esq., as master. The facts appear by the following opinion of the court below : “ The exceptions to the master’s report filed on part of complainants are to the findings of facts.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 190, Oct. T., 1894,'by plaintiffs, from decree of C. P. No. 2, Allegheny Co., July T., 1892, No. 385, dismissing bill in equity. Bill in equity to cancel deed. The case was referred to James S. Young, Esq., as master. The facts appear by the following opinion of the court below : “ The exceptions to the master’s report filed on part of complainants are to the findings of facts. On a review of the evidence we are of the opinion that the master has correctly found the facts against the contention of the complainants. Adopting his findings, we then have the case of a man fully…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Curiam,
The facts of this case are so very similar to the facts in the case of Simon v. Simon, reported in 163 Pa., p. 292, Advance Rep. Oct. 19, 1894, p. 292, that we regard the opinion filed in that case as controlling the decision of this. Here as there the master found upon abundant testimony that there was no mental unsoundness of the grantor, and no undue influence was *16exerted to procure the execution of the deed. Here also the conveyance was prepared by eminent counsel at the instance of the grantor. Here, as in the case cited, the deed was made by parents to a daughter who was…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Wilson v. AndersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Rynd v. BakerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- King v. York Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Lewis v. MerrymanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Hess v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.