Legal Opinion

Logan v. Wiley

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 3, 1947No. Appeal, 161PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Allen M. Steaene,

This action in ejectment requires construction of the following clause in the will of Mary Louise Horn: “7. I give, devise and bequeath to Paul M. Wiley, of Washington, Pennsylvania, the property known as the ‘Daune Building’ on South Main Street, Washington, Pennsylvania, . . . .”

Do these words constitute a clear description of the realty devised, or is the description ambiguous?

A latent ambiguity, contra-distinguished from a patent ambiguity, can only be developed by extrinsic and collateral circumstances: Metzger's Estate, 222 Pa. 276, 71 A. 96;…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Trustees of the Proprietors v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
  2. Metzger's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
  3. Brooklyn Trust Co. v. WarringtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  4. Laidley v. RoweSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  5. Lycoming Mutual Insurance v. SailerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1871

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Herr EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
  2. Beisgen EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  3. Burke, A., Aplt. v. Independence Blue CrossSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
  4. Emor, Inc. v. Cyprus Mines Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
  5. Snadon v. GayerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1978

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API