Heaton v. Pennsylvania Railroad
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
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
- King Et Al., Appellants, v. BrillhartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Citizens Passenger Railway Co. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Williams v. HaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Haverly v. State Line R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. HopeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.