Bridgeford v. Groh Et Ux.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion bv
Mr. Justice Simpson,
After the effective date of the Intestate Act of June 7, 1917, P. L. 429, plaintiff’s husband conveyed certain of his real estate by a deed in which she did not join. After his death, she instituted the present action of dower unde nihil habet (whether or not this is thé proper form of action is not raised on this appeal, and hence is not decided), and claimed to measure the extent of her right in that realty, by the clause in section 3 of the act (P. L. 434), which provides that a widow’s “share in lands aliened by the husband in his lifetime, without her…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Commonwealth ex rel. Attorney General v. SnyderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Reeves v. Philadelphia Suburban Water Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Russell's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Commonwealth v. Pure Oil Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Scaife v. McKeeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Commonwealth v. Great American Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Commonwealth v. Girard Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Singer v. SheppardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Miller v. Northampton CountySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. White v. MillerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.