Huber v. Crosland
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
APPEAL BY DEFENDANTS FBOM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF SCHUYLKILL COUNTY. No. 145 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 342 November Term 1884, C. P. On November 8, 1884, “ Levi Huber and Robert C. Green, trustees, in the order named, for the Equitable Saving Fund & Building Association and the Mutual Saving Fund & Building Association,” brought ejectment against George W. Crosland and Emily Crosland, for a lot of ground on the east side of Centre street, in the…
Read the full summary
APPEAL BY DEFENDANTS FBOM THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF SCHUYLKILL COUNTY. No. 145 January Term 1891, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 342 November Term 1884, C. P. On November 8, 1884, “ Levi Huber and Robert C. Green, trustees, in the order named, for the Equitable Saving Fund & Building Association and the Mutual Saving Fund & Building Association,” brought ejectment against George W. Crosland and Emily Crosland, for a lot of ground on the east side of Centre street, in the borough of Pottsville. The defendants pleaded, not guilty. At the trial on October 1, 1890, the plaintiffs showed title by…
1Per curiam
While the deed from George W. Crosland to Catharine L. Crosland is peculiar in its phraseology, we are of opinion that the entire beneficial interest in the property embraced in the deed remained in the' parties thereto. That this was the construction placed upon it by the parties themselves, is manifest from the fact of their joint execution of a mortgage in fee of the premises to the building association. If they did not think they were the owners in fee, they penetrated a fraud upon the latter. We are unwilling to impute such an act to them, but prefer to believe that they executed the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Roddey v. County Council of County of AlleghenyCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
- Roddey v. County Council of County of AlleghenyCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2004