Ober v. Curnane

The defendant in his brief apparently concedes that an exception to the denial of a motion that the court amplify its findings made after the rendering of the decree raises no question of law. He specifies the one request upon the exception to the denial of which he relies and states the question before this court as follows: “Therefore, the simple issue raised here is whether there was sufficient evidence to warrant the finding that Daniel B. Curnane was guilty of fraud, in obtaining Mr. Powers’ signature to the deed.”

Since the second hearing was not a new trial but merely a continuation of…