Legal Opinion

Hamilton v. Police Beneficiary Ass'n

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 26, 1944No. Appeal, 100PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Keller, P. J.,

We shall not discuss the merits of this case, for an examination of the Rules of Civil Procedure governing Interpleader by Defendants (Rules 2301-2325), which became effective January 22, 1940, satisfies us that the present appeal is interlocutory and must be quashed, because not authorized by the provisions of the Practice Act of 1915, P. L. 483, and its amendments, which are made applicable to such interpleader issues by Rules 2309-2312 inclusive.

The appellant, Ethel Hamilton, the beneficiary in a certificate of membership, issued May 19, 1943, in the Police…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Stamper v. KogelschatzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  2. Deardorff v. Continental Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Garland v. CravenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  2. Slavin v. SlavinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  3. Waples v. Police Beneficiary Ass'nSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  4. Sigora v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  5. Love v. First Securities Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lawrence County1948

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

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

Powered by the Exa API