Bachman v. Gross

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Bachman v. Gross

24 A. 712, 150 Pa. 516, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1354

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided July 13, 1892·No. Appeal, No. 159·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This was an ejectment in the court below. The only speci- . fication of error is that the court imposed full costs, the de[517]*517fendants not having filed a disclaimer. The ruling of the court below is so clearly right, and the appeal itself of such a trifling nature, that we not only affirm the judgment, but also impose the penalty of $20 counsel fee, provided by the act of assembly for frivolous appeals.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam,

This was an ejectment in the court below. The only speci- . fication of error is that the court imposed full costs, the de[517]*517fendants not having filed a disclaimer. The ruling of the court below is so clearly right, and the appeal itself of such a trifling nature, that we not only affirm the judgment, but also impose the penalty of $20 counsel fee, provided by the act of assembly for frivolous appeals.

Bachman v. Gross, 24 A. 712, 150 Pa. 516, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1354 (Pa. 1892).

Pincite

24 A. 712 (Bachman v. Gross) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related