Commonwealth v. La Fitte
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ACTION of debt in the name of the Commonwealth, on an administration bond, against Anthony La Fitte, administrator of Peter La Fitte, and Aimé Brandt and Anthony Terradell, his sureties. It was submitted to arbitrators agreeably to the act of 20th March, 1810,(a) who on the 21st July, 1815, awarded against the defendants 6000 dollars, the penalty of the bond.
Read the full summary
ACTION of debt in the name of the Commonwealth, on an administration bond, against Anthony La Fitte, administrator of Peter La Fitte, and Aimé Brandt and Anthony Terradell, his sureties. It was submitted to arbitrators agreeably to the act of 20th March, 1810,(a) who on the 21st July, 1815, awarded against the defendants 6000 dollars, the penalty of the bond. On the 9th of the following August, they filed several exceptions to the award, which the decision of the Court renders it unnecessary to state. now moved to dismiss the exceptions, alleging, that in a case of this kind the only remedy…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The exceptions must be dismissed. The case amounts to this. The defendants complain, that the arbitrators erred in point of law, in rejecting his evidence. But supposing it to be so, the remedy is not by filing exceptions ; but by appeal. The act of assembly gives the arbitrators the power of deciding on the competency of evidence, as well as its credibility, and to determine all questions in the cause, as well of law as of fact. And the award, when filed in the office of the prothonotary, is to be considered as a judgment until reversed. The defendant, therefore, has mistaken…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Le Barron v. HarriottSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1830