Hall v. Phillips
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 48, Oct. T., 1894, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Butler Co., June T., 1891, No. 10, on verdict for plaintiff. Assumpsit on oil lease.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 48, Oct. T., 1894, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Butler Co., June T., 1891, No. 10, on verdict for plaintiff. Assumpsit on oil lease. Before Greer, P. J. At the trial it appeared that the clause of the lease upon which plaintiffs claimed to recover was as follows: “ The party of the second part [defendant] covenants to commence operations for said mining purposes within three months from the date of this lease, or thereafter pay the said party of the first part one hundred and eighty dollars per annum until work is commenced, to be paid quarterly.” The lease also contained…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Cubiam,
Notwithstanding the fact that we have so frequently called attention to the necessity of compliance with the rules of court, j'elating to assignments of error, these rules are still too frequently ignored. The only remedy for this is enforcement of the penalties prescribed in said rules. The penalty for noncompliance with rule xxii is, “ a waiver of all errors so alleged : ” that attached to rules xxm and xxiv is, that “ any assignment of error not according to ” them, respectively, “ will be held the same as none.” Rule xxm provides : “ When the error is assigned to the charge of…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Commonwealth v. SimonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Hamilton v. FleckSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Commonwealth v. StovasSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Dotterer v. ScottSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- B. F. Lee Co. v. ShermanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.