Bullitt's Appeal
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 92, Jan. T., 1912, by John Christian Bullitt, Jr., from the order of C. P. Delaware Co., March T., 1910, No. 353, sustaining exceptions to inquisition in lunacy in the matter of John Christian Bullitt, Jr., an alleged lunatic. Exceptions to inquisition. Before Johnson, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the case. Error assigned was, among others, the quashing and dismissing of all the proceedings.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 92, Jan. T., 1912, by John Christian Bullitt, Jr., from the order of C. P. Delaware Co., March T., 1910, No. 353, sustaining exceptions to inquisition in lunacy in the matter of John Christian Bullitt, Jr., an alleged lunatic. Exceptions to inquisition. Before Johnson, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the case. Error assigned was, among others, the quashing and dismissing of all the proceedings. At common law and under the Statute of 2 & 3 Edward VI, in proceedings de lunático inquirendo, the method of attacking the finding of the inquisition where it was against the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Brown,
In 1910 proceedings were instituted in the court below by a brother and two sisters of John C. Bullitt, Jr., to inquire into his lunacy. The inquest found that he was not a lunatic. Upon return of the inquisition exceptions were filed by the appellees to the admission and rejection of evidence at the hearing before the commissioner. These exceptions were filed under the provisions of the Act of June 10, 1897, P. L. 138, which are as follows: “All testimony hereafter taken before sheriff’s juries in inquisitions of lunacy shall be taken and filed by the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- In re WeaverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1887
- Commonwealth v. HarroldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
3Cited by1 opinion
- Commonwealth v. DavidsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920