Legal Opinion

Waltman v. Mayer

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 8, 1929No. Appeal 39PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Linn, J.,

As the non-suit was properly entered for want of proof that the two mirrors in question were part of the realty — that is, a part of the house — we shall not stop to consider whether the plaintiffs showed any right to sue, as no argument was made on the point.

After the death of John B. Mayer, owner of premises 4400 North Broad Street, Philadelphia, disputes eon cerning the devolution of his property arose and were settled by agreement made by defendant and some or all of the other parties to this ease. It was agreed that she “was entitled to the household furniture and…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Voorhis v. FreemanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
  2. Hill v. SewaldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1867
  3. National Bank v. NorthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
  4. Dunmore v. PaddenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
  5. McClintock & Irvine Co. v. Ætna Explosives Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In the Matter of Universal Medical Services, Inc., Debtor. Appeal of Irving H. Kutcher, Trustee in BankruptcyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
  2. Copley v. Stewart, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Armstrong County1930
  3. O'Donnell v. Schneeweis, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Chester County1975

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

Powered by the Exa API