Legal Opinion

Hindman v. Farren

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 26, 1945No. Appeals, 76 and 88PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Horace Stern,

This case turns on the interpretation to be given to two clauses — one in a lease and one in a deed. Plaintiff would have the lease construed from a practical rather than a literal standpoint; defendants and additional defendant, while opposing this, seels that same lsind of construction in the case of the deed. We think it is the method which should be adopted as to both instruments, for, where there is any doubt or ambiguity as to the meaning of the covenants in a contract or the terms of a grant, they should “receive a reasonable construction, and one…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Slonaker v. P. G. Publishing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  2. Provident Life & Trust Co. v. Mercer CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  3. Connery v. BrookeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1873
  4. McCormack v. JermynSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  5. Camden Safe Deposit & Trust Co. v. EavensonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928

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

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Giant Food Stores, LLC v. THF Silver Spring Development, LPSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  2. United Refining Co. v. JenkinsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  3. Betterman v. American Stores Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  4. Maxwell v. SaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  5. Shipley v. Pittsburgh & L. E. R. Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1949

30 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