Thompson ex rel. Church v. Sankey
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 209, Jan. T., 1896, by plaintiff:, from order of C. P. Union Co., Sept. T., 1894, No. 62, distributing proceeds of sheriffs sale of real estate. Exceptions to auditor’s report distributing proceeds of sheriff’s sale of real estate. The case was referred to D. W. Cox, Esq., as auditor.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 209, Jan. T., 1896, by plaintiff:, from order of C. P. Union Co., Sept. T., 1894, No. 62, distributing proceeds of sheriffs sale of real estate. Exceptions to auditor’s report distributing proceeds of sheriff’s sale of real estate. The case was referred to D. W. Cox, Esq., as auditor. Exceptions to the auditor’s report were dismissed, McClure, P. J., filing the following opinion: As we have reached the same conclusion as the learned auditor, but by an entirely different route, it is necessary that our reasons be given at some length.. The lands of the defendant sold by the sheriff…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Curiam,
We find no error in this record. The questions involved have been fully considered and correctly decided by the learned president of the common pleas; and there appears to be nothing in any of them that requires further discussion. The decree is affirmed on the opinion of the court below, and the appeal is dismissed at the costs of the appellant Charles P. Hewes, administrator, etc.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Shuster v. BarkusSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963