Andrews v. Fishing Creek Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 223, Jan. T., 1894, by E. Keeler Co., from order of C. P. Columbia Co., Feb. T., 1890, No. 7, dismissing exceptions to auditor’s report. Exceptions to auditor’s report distributing proceeds of sheriff’s sale of realty.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 223, Jan. T., 1894, by E. Keeler Co., from order of C. P. Columbia Co., Feb. T., 1890, No. 7, dismissing exceptions to auditor’s report. Exceptions to auditor’s report distributing proceeds of sheriff’s sale of realty. The opinion of court below was as follows by Ikeleb, P. J.: “ By a number of decisions of the Supreme Court of this state, we are led to the conclusion that the auditor was right in disallowing the claim, or right, of E. Keeler & Co. to have any portion of the fund impounded. “ Had we the auditor’s report before us, which, on account of its loss, seems impossible at…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The court below had power to make distribution’without the aid of an auditor. The fund was referred however to an auditor who heard the parties and made a report. After confirmation nisi the report seems to have been mislaid or lost. This however did not prevent the hearing of the exceptions to the report, and a final decree in accordance with the distribution made by the auditor. The court had the power to inquire into the nature of the report and to determine the validity of the exceptions taken to the distribution proposed. It was not necessary to recommit the case.
The judgment…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Rosenberg v. CupersmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
- Knoell v. CareySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Collegeville National Bank v. Frehafer, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County1955
- First National Bank of York v. R. & H. Construction Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, York County1963
- Roy Building & Loan Ass'n v. King, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County1931