Paul v. Grimm
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 7, Oct. T., 1897, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Westmoreland Co., Feb. T., 1889, No. 428, in favor of plaintiffs on trial by court without a jury. Assumpsit. Trial by court without a jury by agreement of the parties.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 7, Oct. T., 1897, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Westmoreland Co., Feb. T., 1889, No. 428, in favor of plaintiffs on trial by court without a jury. Assumpsit. Trial by court without a jury by agreement of the parties. The facts appear by the previous report of the case in 165 Pa. 139. Doty, P. J., filed the following opinion upon exceptions filed after judgment was entered in accordance with the opinion of the Supreme Court: Judgment was promptly entered in strict accordance with the order of the Supreme Court. To this judgment exceptions were filed as follows : 1. The…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Febl,
The judgment against the defendant as administrator, to which exceptions were filed in the common pleas, was entered by direction of this Court, and was in entire accordance with the order made. Two of the exceptions related to findings of fact by the court at the trial, which had taken place five years before, and the evident purpose of the appellant was to secure by this means a rehearing of the case. The third exception questioned the validity of the judgment on the ground that the agreement to waive trial by jury was not authorized by the defendant, and could…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Haefele v. DavisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
- Harris v. DawsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Blymiller v. BaccantiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Denver Park & Amusement Co. v. KirchhofSupreme Court of Colorado · 1931
- Smyers v. AlbertSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.