Legal Opinion

Getty v. A. Hupfel's Sons

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 7, 1923No. 2807PublishedCited by 4 opinions

In Equity. Suit for injunction by Marget Getty against A. Hupfel’s Sons, a corporation.

1Opinion of the Court

DICKINSON, District Judge.

This cause came on as a motion for a preliminary injunction. It developed, however, that .there were no facts in controversy, and that the sole question was one of law. Accepting this situation, the parties have stipulated the facts and submitted the cause for final decree as upon a trial hearing on bill, answer, and proofs.

Fact Finding.

There are three pertinent facts out of which the question of law to be determined arises. These facts are:(1) The title to the real estate, premises No. 4451 North Seventh street, in the city of Philadelphia, was vested in Bernard…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Beihl v. MartinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
  2. Fleek v. ZillhaverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1887

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Kerin v. PalumboCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1932
  2. Blusiewicz v. Rosenfield, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County1964
  3. United States v. Provident Trust Co. of PennsylvaniaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1929
  4. Commonwealth v. Silvestro, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1954

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

Powered by the Exa API