Dunlap v. Harbinson
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 3, Oct. T., 1916, by plaintiff, from decree of O. P. No. 5, Philadelphia Co'., June T., 1914, No. 673, dismissing bill in equity in case of William A. Dunlap, Supreme Grand Master of the Supreme Grand Lodge of the Loyal Orange Institution of the United States of America; The State Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania of the Loyal Orange Institution of the United States of America et al. v. Charles Harbinson et al.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 3, Oct. T., 1916, by plaintiff, from decree of O. P. No. 5, Philadelphia Co'., June T., 1914, No. 673, dismissing bill in equity in case of William A. Dunlap, Supreme Grand Master of the Supreme Grand Lodge of the Loyal Orange Institution of the United States of America; The State Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania of the Loyal Orange Institution of the United States of America et al. v. Charles Harbinson et al. Bill in equity for an injunction to restore officers of a beneficial association to their prerogative. Before Ralston, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior…
1Concurrence
Concurring Opinion by
Williams, J.:. The bill filed avers that plaintiffs were the officers of the Loyal Orange Institution of the TJ. S. A., and prays, inter alia, for an injunction “requiring the several de*570fendants to take the necessary action to completely restore to the Supreme Grand Lodge' and the State Grand Lodge, or their properly constituted officers, their several prerogatives and rights as officers thereof.” The answer denies that the plaintiffs were, and avers that the defendants are the officers of the society. The court below dismissed the bill because, inter alia, the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bedford Springs Co. v. McMeenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Gallagher v. McAdamsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Hayes v. SturgesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906