Hoyt v. Kingston Coal Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 34, Jan. T., 1901, by defendant, from decree of C. P. Luzerne Co., March T., 1896, No. 2, on bill in equity in case of John D. Hoyt et al. v. Kingston Coal Company. Bill in equity for an account and for an injunction.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 34, Jan. T., 1901, by defendant, from decree of C. P. Luzerne Co., March T., 1896, No. 2, on bill in equity in case of John D. Hoyt et al. v. Kingston Coal Company. Bill in equity for an account and for an injunction. From the record it appeared that various requests for findings of fact and conclusions of law were presented by the defendant, but that none of these were answered or considered, except in so far as some of them may have been substantially answered in the judge’s own findings and conclusions. The court entered a decree for the plaintiffs. ¡Errors assigned, among…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Brown,
Nine requests for findings of fact and for conclusions of law were presented by the. appellant to the court below, but not *510one of them was formally adopted, affirmed, qualified or denied. All seem to have been formally ignored when the learned judge below filed his findings of fact and law in his own language ; and, when notice was again called to them by exceptions, no disposition was made of them. Under the rule as to findings by a judge, sitting as chancellor, it was the right of counsel for the defendant to present these requests, and it was the duty of the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Lehigh Valley Coal Co. v. EverhartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Myers v. Consumers' Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Glenn v. J. C. Trees Oil Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Reid v. ReidSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Palmer Water Co. v. Lehighton Water Supply Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.