Legal Opinion

Swartz v. Bixler

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 6, 1918No. Appeal, No. 56PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal, No. 56, Jan. T., 1918, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Northampton County, Sept. T., 1917, No. 41, for defendant, on findings of fact and conclusions of law, in case tried without a jury, in case of Mark T. Swartz v. Fannie T. Bixler and Arthur B. Bixler, individually and as partners trading as A. B. Bixler & Company. Ejectment for real estate in Northampton County.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 56, Jan. T., 1918, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Northampton County, Sept. T., 1917, No. 41, for defendant, on findings of fact and conclusions of law, in case tried without a jury, in case of Mark T. Swartz v. Fannie T. Bixler and Arthur B. Bixler, individually and as partners trading as A. B. Bixler & Company. Ejectment for real estate in Northampton County. McKeen, J., filed the following opinion: The plaintiff in the above stated case brought an action of ejectment to recover premises demised by his predecessor in title unto Fannie T. Bixler, Arthur B. Bixler and Samuel…

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

The judgment in this case is affirmed on the opinion of the learned judge below finding that the appellees were entitled to it.

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Burke to Use v. BryantSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  2. Adelstein v. GreenbergCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
  3. B. C. & H. Corp. v. Acme Markets, Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Somerset County1980
  4. Cinci v. Fort Mason Coal Mining Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Fayette County1952

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

Powered by the Exa API