Wieman v. Anderson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error, to the District Court of Philadelphia, This was an issue under the Sheriff’s Interpleader Act, in which Joseph Anderson and Emma his wife, in right of said Emma, were plaintiffs, and John H. Wieman defendant, to ascertain the ownership of certain goods which were claimed by said Emma, but which had been levied on as the property of Joseph Anderson, at the suit of said Wieman.
Read the full summary
Error, to the District Court of Philadelphia, This was an issue under the Sheriff’s Interpleader Act, in which Joseph Anderson and Emma his wife, in right of said Emma, were plaintiffs, and John H. Wieman defendant, to ascertain the ownership of certain goods which were claimed by said Emma, but which had been levied on as the property of Joseph Anderson, at the suit of said Wieman. The case was this: — In July 1857, John H. Wieman, sold to Joseph Anderson, a grocer, doing business at 118- South Second street, Philadelphia, a bill of segars amounting to $436, for which, in December 1857, he…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, April 21st 1862, by
Woodward, J.
The proof was clear -to the last degree, that the stock of goods in Anderson’s grocery in January 1858, became the separate property of his wife. They were sold at sheriff’s sale to Henry Neill, the brother of Mrs. Anderson, and by him presented to her. The judgment on which the sale took place was confessed by Anderson to Neill, but it was not impeached, or even questioned for fraud. The money bid for the goods,- some $800, did not reach Neill’s writ, and was consequently paid by him to prior lien-creditors. Thus he…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jones v. JonesOhio Supreme Court · 1832
3Cited by2 opinions
- Phillips v. HallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Jiles v. JilesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916