Meigs v. Milligan
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 173, July T., 1895, by defendant, from decree of C. P. No. 4, Philadelphia County, June T., 1894, No. 1024, on bill in equity. Bill in equity for an injunction to enforce a building restriction.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 173, July T., 1895, by defendant, from decree of C. P. No. 4, Philadelphia County, June T., 1894, No. 1024, on bill in equity. Bill in equity for an injunction to enforce a building restriction. Before Arnold, J. It was agreed that the following statement of facts should be filed of record in this case, to have the same force and effect as if duly proved and found according to equity practice: 1. The plaintiffs are the owners in fee simple of premises No. 1208 Walnut street, as set forth in paragraph 1 of their bill. 2. The defendant, William Milligan, is the owner by deed dated…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Chief Justice Sterrett,
After this cause was regularly at issue, it was agreed by the parties that certain facts, recited in their statement filed, shall “ have the same force and effect as if duly proved and found according to equity practice,” and that said facts shall, “ be a substitute for all allegations of fact in the bill and answer,” and further that said last mentioned allegations of fact “shall not be evidence for any purpose.” The ease was accordingly heard and disposed of on the substituted facts recited in said statement ; and the sole question is whether upon those…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Jones v. Securities & Exchange CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Firth v. MarovichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
- Hohl v. ModellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
- Cheris's Liquor License CaseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Hansell v. DowningSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.