Legal Opinion

Armour Leather Co. v. Alexander

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 26, 1923No. Appeal, No. 146PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

After argument the court below made a formal order dismissing plaintiffs’ bill, on the ground of multifariousness, they refusing to amend, although tendered an opportunity so to do. No other decree was entered. More than six months thereafter, plaintiffs changed their minds and petitioned for leave to amend; this being refused, they entered the present appeal, which we quashed because taken too late. No appeal lies from, a refusal to allow an amendment after final decree, but only from the final decree itself. Apparently recognizing this, plaintiffs now ask us to review our action,…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Yeager v. United Natural Gas Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  2. Hanna EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  3. Murphy v. MurphySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  4. Meadville Telephone Co. v. ShaferSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1928

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API