Legal Opinion

Froio v. Armstrong

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 19, 1923No. 1; Appeal, No. 231PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Me. Justice Schaffer,

The defendant, Henry H. Hall, appeals from a decree adjudging two bonds and mortgages held by him to be void, and directing him to deliver them up to plaintiffs for cancellation. The facts in the record are somewhat complicated and a review of all of them would accomplish no useful purpose.

The wrongs for which plaintiffs seek redress are due to a most palpable fraud committed by the defendant, Armstrong, of which they and the other defendant, Hall, were the victims. Armstrong was a real estate agent, the Froios, plaintiffs, husband and wife, had been concerned…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. O'Connor v. ClarkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
  2. Shattuck v. American Cement Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Mielcuszny Et Ux. v. Rosol (Et Ux.)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  2. Williams v. CookSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  3. Browne v. HoekstraSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  4. Peters v. AlterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  5. Pore v. Duke Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931

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

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

Powered by the Exa API