Miller v. Hellam Distilling Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 6, March T., 1914, by E. T. Eyster, from decree of C. P. York Co., Jan. T., 1908, No. 2, dismissing exceptions to report of auditor in case of Wolf Miller et al. v. Hellam Distilling Company. Exceptions to report of Donald H. Yost, Esq., auditor. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was in dismissing exceptions to auditor’s report.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Kephart, J.,
This is an appeal from the order of the court below dismissing appellant’s exceptions to the report of the auditor, who was appointed to distribute the funds in the hands of the receiver arising from the sale of the property of the Hellam Distilling Company. By proper corporate action this company authorized the execution of a mortgage securing an issue of bonds to the amount of $50,000. Of this issue, bonds were sold for cash to the amount of $14,500, and some time after the sale of these bonds for cash but prior to the appointment of the receiver, bonds of the par…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Handley v. StutzSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Memphis & Little Rock Railroad v. DowSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Clark v. BeverSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Fogg v. BlairSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Peoria & Springfield Railroad v. ThompsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1882
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Houghten v. Restland Memorial Park, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Grange Natl. Bank v. CollmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- In re Mifflinburg Body Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
- In re Sharon-Warren Iron & Metal Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1925
- In re Mifflinburg Body Co.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1941