Legal Opinion

Plummer v. Hillside Coal & Iron Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 5, 1929No. Appeal 7PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Baldrige, J.,

On March 5, 1902, the plaintiff filed this bill in equity Setting forth that she was the owner of fifty (50) acres of the surface of the London or Cal-lender Tract, which contained one hundred forty-five (145) acres, and an undivided six-seventh (6/7ths) of the reversion of the coal, remaining after a termination of a lease, under the entire tract; and twenty-five (25) acres of the surface of the tract immediately adjacent to the London and known as the Woodbridge Tract. The coal underlying the latter tract was severed in title with the right to mine and remove, before…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Noonan v. PardeeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
  2. Berkey v. Berwind-White Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  3. Osmer v. SheasleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  4. Berkey v. Berwind-White Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. FisherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  2. Sefton v. Valley Dairy Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  3. Brown v. GeorgeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  4. Greek Catholic Congregation v. Wilson Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  5. Commonwealth v. FisherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API