Legal Opinion

Heaton v. Pennsylvania Railroad

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 30, 1929No. Appeal 320PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Keller, J.,

The order appealed from is an interlocutory one, from which no appeal lies. The appeal must, therefore, he quashed. However, as both parties have asked us to express our views on the authority of the court below to make the order, and as the case was argued on its merits, for the purpose of saving unnecessary delay and the expense incident to another appeal on the same ground (See Citizens Pass. Ry. Company v. P. S. C., 271 Pa. 39; United Security Title Ins. Company v. Moskowitz, 95 Pa. Superior Ct. 597; Willetts v. Willetts, 97 Pa. Superior Ct. 317), we deem it proper to…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. King Et Al., Appellants, v. BrillhartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Citizens Passenger Railway Co. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  3. Williams v. HaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
  4. Haverly v. State Line R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
  5. Pennsylvania Railroad v. HopeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Metropolitan Electric Manufacturing Co. v. Browne, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County1930

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

Powered by the Exa API