Commonwealth ex rel. Hensel v. Order of Solon
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 22, May T., 1899, by Samuel J. M. McCarrell, from order of C. P. Dauphin Co., June T., 1894, No. 310, dismissing exceptions to auditors’ report. Exceptions to auditors’ report.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 22, May T., 1899, by Samuel J. M. McCarrell, from order of C. P. Dauphin Co., June T., 1894, No. 310, dismissing exceptions to auditors’ report. Exceptions to auditors’ report. The facts appear by the auditors’ report which was in part as follows: As to the question whether or not the fund for distribution has escheated to the commonwealth, the escheator, S. J. M. McCarrell, Esq., as well as his counsel, James Fitzsimmons, Esq., of Pittsburg, were present with your auditors at several hearings, and advanced no arguments whatever in support of the claim of the commonwealth for this…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
Our examination of this record has satisfied us that the learned president of the common pleas was clearly right in dismissing the four exceptions that are recited in appellant’s specifications of error. There is no merit in either of 'said specifications, and they are therefore dismissed and the decree is affirmed at appellant’s costs.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Advance Beneficial Order's Assigned EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911