Pokrzywnicki v. Kozak, Jr.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Jones,
The question in this case is whether the learned chancellor of the court below abused his discretion when he denied the plaintiff’s motion for leave to file exceptions to an adjudication and decree nisi, nunc pro tunc. While the appeal is necessarily from the final decree which was entered on the basis of the decree nisi, the merits of the controversy are not before us.
Under Equity Buie 69, exceptions to an adjudication and decree nisi may be filed, as of right, by either party within ten days after notice thereof. The Equity Buies were not intended, however, to be…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Mielcuszny Et Ux. v. Rosol (Et Ux.)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Borough of Sunbury v. Sunbury & Susquehanna Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
- Hinnershitz v. United Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
3Cited by8 opinions
- Brodsky v. Philadelphia Athletic Club, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Donegal Mutual Insurance v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
- Haefele v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
- Bruder v. CarlinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Anderson v. Craft, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Pike County1948
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.