Bowman v. Knorr
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 345, Jan. T., 1903, by E. B. Brower, from order .of C. P. Columbia Co., dismissing exceptions to auditor’s report in case of Bowman et ah, to use of George W. Vansiclen v. Samuel Knorr. Exceptions to auditor’s report. From the record it appeared that Samuel Knorr died on March 2, 1889, seized of a tract of land in Centre township.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 345, Jan. T., 1903, by E. B. Brower, from order .of C. P. Columbia Co., dismissing exceptions to auditor’s report in case of Bowman et ah, to use of George W. Vansiclen v. Samuel Knorr. Exceptions to auditor’s report. From the record it appeared that Samuel Knorr died on March 2, 1889, seized of a tract of land in Centre township. On May 22,1894, Lloyd S. Wintersteen began an action against Mary L. Knorr, executrix of Samuel Knorr, deceased, and secured a judgment for $20,167.68, which by renewals amounted on October 1, 1900 to $26,372.78. The land was sold in foreclosure…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Fell,
The appellant is the assignee of a judgment obtained on an action against an executrix which was commenced more than five years after the death of the decedent. As the debt was not a lien on the real estate from the sale of which the fund arose, the auditor was right in disallowing the claim.
The decree confirming the auditor’s report on this subject is affirmed.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Kirk v. Van HornSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Rosengarten's EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1906