Sutmeyer v. Thornton
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 36, April T., 1916, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Allegheny Co., Oct. T., 1912, No. 2851, on verdict for defendant in case of Sarah Sutmeyer and Ethel Sutmeyer McKee v. James J. Thornton. Assumpsit for use and occupation of real estate. Before Haymaker, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Verdict and judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 36, April T., 1916, by plaintiffs, from judgment of C. P. Allegheny Co., Oct. T., 1912, No. 2851, on verdict for defendant in case of Sarah Sutmeyer and Ethel Sutmeyer McKee v. James J. Thornton. Assumpsit for use and occupation of real estate. Before Haymaker, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Verdict and judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned was in directing a verdict for defendant. cited: Bush v. National Oil Refining Co., 5 W. N. C. 143; Williams v. Ladew, 171 Pa. 369. This is an action of assumpsit to recover for use and…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Henderson, J.,
This is an action for use and .occupation. The heirs of Henry Sutmeyer were the owners of the premises No. 901 and No. 903 Federal street. They leased No. 901 *609and one room on the second floor of 903 to the defendant, who kept a hotel in the demised premises. During the defendant’s occupancy a proceeding for partition of the estate was instituted, which was finally confirmed July 10, 1909. Under the allotment the plaintiffs acquired premises No. 903, and soon thereafter Edward G. Lang was made their agent to lease and collect rents for them. The defendant remained in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Grove v. BarclaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
3Cited by3 opinions
- Crawford EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
- Taylor v. KaufholdSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
- Eisen v. EisenPennylvania Municipal Court, Philadelphia County · 1949