Legal Opinion

Browne v. Hoekstra

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 18, 1924No. Appeal, No. 25PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Schaffer,

By their bill in equity, plaintiffs sought a decree compelling defendant to enter satisfaction on the record of a mortgage covering their property, claiming they had paid the principal thereof to his duly constituted agent, William J. Lawson, who turned out to be a defaulter and absconded. After hearing, the court granted the' *421relief prayed for and defendant, the mortgagee, has appealed.

The decision of the case is not free from difficulty and but for one of the findings of the chancellor the decree entered could not be sustained. He concluded and so found that…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Glenn v. TreesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  2. Mynick v. BickingsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
  3. Froio v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  4. Hardinge v. KuntzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  5. Bangor Silk Knitting Co. v. WiseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Mielcuszny Et Ux. v. Rosol (Et Ux.)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  2. Williams v. CookSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  3. Carbondale's ElectionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  4. Lewis v. MatiasSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  5. Mikos v. KidaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API