Central Reporter; All Cases Determined in the Courts of Last Resort, as Follows

Central Reporter; All Cases Determined in the Courts of Last Resort, as Follows : New York ... New Jersey ... Pennsylvania ... Delaware ... Maryland ... District of Columbia Volume 7

By (author) 

List price: US$27.94

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1887 edition. Excerpt: ... common pleas. Gourley V. Kinley, 66 Pa. 270. It follows that as the ejectment involved simply the relationship of the plaintiff to the decedent, one verdict and judgment are conclusive of that controversy between the parties, and that the plaintifl is entitled to an undisturbed partition with his coheirs. It was proper for the defendant to fput in evidence the charge of the court in the ormer ejectment, for the purpose of showing on what point the case was decided. Coleman's App. 62 Pa. 272; Eclmmn v. Eek-man, 68 Pa. 468; Follansbee v. Walker, 74 Pa. 309; Ca-nnony v. Hoober, 5 Pa. 805. The fact that the equity claim was decided in a former action of e'ectment may be shown by parol testimony, and need not appear by the record, imaided by other evidence. P Mggigra v. Hill, 46 Pa. 9; Treftz v. Pitts, 74 a.. The Act of Assembly of 1807, providing that two verdicts shall sett e the right, has nothing to do with this contention, because only applicable to that class of cases wherein ejectment is purely a possessory action; and not where it is a substitute for another method of trial. Meme. Wharton Morris, Wm. H. LIVingood, Geo. P. Baor and A. G. Green, for defendantsin error: The tfiestion here raised was long since settled in ehafy v.Dobba, 9 Watts, 3. If a party having no title under the Intestate Act petition for an inquest, his allegation of title as a tenant in common, if disputed, must be first established by ejectment in the common pleas; but if admitted, the decree founded on it is conclusive. Herr v. Herr, 5 Pa. 428. From these authorities it is evident that Baltzer Gehr could not apply to the orphans' court to have a disputed question of relationship determined. His only remedy was acommonlaw action of egectment, in which, ...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 968 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 49mm | 1,692g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236808940
  • 9781236808943