Linsenbigler v. Gourley
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Armstrong county: No. 42, to October and November Term 1867. This was an action of assumpsit, to March Term 1863, by Matilda J. Linsenbigler against George A. Gourley.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Armstrong county: No. 42, to October and November Term 1867. This was an action of assumpsit, to March Term 1863, by Matilda J. Linsenbigler against George A. Gourley. The action was on a note dated July 26th 1861, from George A. Gourley, the defendant, to B. E. Gourley, payable one day after date, for $265.76. The case had been already tried and a verdict rendered for the plaintiff, the judgment on which was reversed hy the Supreme Court (1 P. F. Smith 357). The plaintiff gave evidence by Joseph K. Patterson that B. F. Gourley enlisted July 27th 1861;…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, January 7th 1868, by
Agnew, J.
The principal question in this case was decided when it was here before: 1 P. E. Smith 345. It was then held that the defendant’s note was not a donatio eausa mortis. It is quite as manifest it was not an absolute gift.
The utmost that can he claimed from the testimony of Patterson and the letters, was an intention that the plaintiff should get it in case the deceased should not return. Patterson says, speaking of the sealed envelope enclosing the notes, “ he told me to give it to Tilda Linsenbigler,” and said, “ if Tie never…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Eichelberger v. MorrisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837
3Cited by15 opinions
- Link's Estate (No. 1)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Overbrook Heights Building & Loan Ass'n v. WilsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Long's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Marsteller's EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Oudry-Davis v. FindleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.