Legal Opinion

Beach's Estate (Lorenzo's Petition)

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 30, 1936No. Appeal, 174PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

Appellant submitted his case without any argument in his brief. The general rule is that appellant must not only specifically assign as error any rulings complained of but further must point out wherein the error lies and reasons therefor, or they will be deemed to have been waived: see Bass v. State, 58 Fla. 1, 50 So. 531; Rayburn v. Guntersville Realty Co., 228 Ala. 662, 154 So. 812; Cropsey v. Cropsey, 104 N. J. Eq. 187, 144 Atl. 621. In other words, counsel must point out the reason why the ruling is claimed to be erroneous. In Noble v. Noble, 198 Cal. 129, 243 Pac. 439, the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Universal Adjustment Corp. v. Midland Bank, Ltd., of LondonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
  2. Noble v. NobleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Bass v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1909
  4. Cropsey v. CropseySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1929
  5. Rayburn v. Guntersville Realty Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1934

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Harman Et Ux. v. ChambersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  2. Stoner EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  3. Lynch v. Hickey Et Ux.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  4. Superior Mining Co. Property Tax SaleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  5. Kubert v. Fidelity BankSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976

5 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