Legal Opinion

Neubert v. Armstrong Water Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 21, 1904PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pee Curiam,

Section 11 of the Act of May 5, 1899, P. L. 248 reads as follows: “ Whenever an appeal is taken to the Superior Court the appellee shall be held to have waived objection to the ju*609risdiction of that court unless he file with the prothonotary thereof an objection on this ground on or prior to the hearing of the appeal by the Superior Court. If the objection is made, the Superior Court shall hear and decide it speedily; and, if it is sustained, and the appeal is certified to the. Supreme Court, the prothonotary of the Superior Court shall, in addition to the appeal costs already paid,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Commonwealth ex rel. Henderson v. O'DonnellSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
  2. Brower v. KantnerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Walker's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  2. Bily v. Board of Property AssessmentSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  3. Caruso v. GalloSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
  4. Ribblet v. WestrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  5. Nixon's EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911

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

Powered by the Exa API