Deringer v. Coxe
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Luzerne County to review a judgment on a verdict for defendants in ejectment. The facts appear from the charge to the jury by Hand, P. J., which was as follows: This is an action to determine the legal title to one ninth of an undivided tract of land in the warrantee name of Samuel Pope, Sugarloaf township, Luzerne county.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Luzerne County to review a judgment on a verdict for defendants in ejectment. The facts appear from the charge to the jury by Hand, P. J., which was as follows: This is an action to determine the legal title to one ninth of an undivided tract of land in the warrantee name of Samuel Pope, Sugarloaf township, Luzerne county. The trial was opened to ascertain the title of two ninths, one ninth alleged to be in favor of the Todds, heirs of Henry Deringer, and one ninth in Calhoun Deringer. The one ninth of the Todds has been released by deed to the defendants, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Pbr Curiam:
We have given to the evidence in this case a due examination, and to the able argument of the counsel for the plaintiffs a care*291ful consideration. The validity of the tax sales depended upon facts proper to be submitted to the jury. Those facts were clearly and correctly submitted. We discover no error in the rejection of evidence, nor in the answers to tbe points submitted. We find no jnst cause for reversing tbe judgment.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Champlin v. LeeSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1867