Legal Opinion

Hay v. Hillegass

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 3, 1923No. Appeal, No. 149PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Sadler,

Valentine Hay was the plaintiff in a judgment, payable in installments, entered against the Berlin Smokeless Coal & Coke Co., and received from Hillegass and Miller, who were largely interested in the company, a collateral note in like amount, which was also made a matter of record. An execution was issued on the principal obligation, a part being overdue, and, at the request of the sureties, Rohm advanced the necessary funds to satisfy the sheriff, and to him there was assigned a proportionate part of both judgments, subject to the right of priority in payment of…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Beaver v. SlaneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Ramsey's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
  3. McGunnegle v. Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  4. First Nationall Bank v. DissingerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  5. Berlin Smokeless Coal & Clay Co. v. RohmSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Northvue Water Co. v. Municipal Water & Sewer AuthorityCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  2. Pure Oil Co. v. ShliferSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  3. Huddleston v. DwyerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1943
  4. Miller's EstatePennsylvania Orphans' Court, Montgomery County · 1931
  5. Northvue W. Co. v. MUN. W. & SA of CEN. T.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1972

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

Powered by the Exa API