Bissell v. Steel
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court'of Philadelphia: No. 100, to January Term 1871. This was a feigned issue under a sheriff’s interpleader, in which George H. Bissell and others, trading as George II.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court'of Philadelphia: No. 100, to January Term 1871. This was a feigned issue under a sheriff’s interpleader, in which George H. Bissell and others, trading as George II. Bissell & Co., were claimants and plaintiffs, and A. H. Steel defendant; the issue was made up September 7th 1868. The goods in controversy were 516 barrels of petroleum, levied on as the property of H. W. Scott & Co. under an execution -at the suit of A. H. Steel, the defendant in the interpleader. On the 9th, ,10th, 11th, and 13th days of July 1868, H. W. Scott & Co. shipped by the Empire…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered,
by Williams, J.
If the plaintiffs were not the .absolute owners of the oil levied on by the sheriff, then, under the ruling of this court in Meyers v. Prentzell, 9 Casey 482, and Stewart & Co. v. Wilson et al., 6 Wright 450, the judgment of nonsuit was rightly entered, and the court in banc properly refused to set it aside. Under the issue as formed the burden was on the plaintiffs of showing that at the time the oil was levied on it was- their property. It was shipped by Scott & Co., the owners, from Bouseville, Venango county, by the Empire…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Knowles v. JacobsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- First National Bank of Chicago v. W. J. Hartzell Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913