Bellas v. Levy

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Bellas v. Levy

2 Rawle 21, 1829 Pa. LEXIS 117

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJune 29, 1829

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 2 Rawle 21 (Bellas v. Levy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bellas v. Levy, 2 Rawle 21, 1829 Pa. LEXIS 117 (Pa. 1829).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

— It is impossible to distinguish this ease from Cunningham v. Irwin, 7 Serg. & Rawle, 247, and Gratz v. Phillips, 14 Serg. & Rawle, 144, in which a report of referees,' under the act of assembly of 1705, like á verdict, was held to be subject to the legal discretion of the- court. Here the question of interest being a question of damages, depending on the peculiar circumstances of the case, presents no point for the legitimate consideration of a court of error. But in Gratz v. Phillips, it was determined, that such a report cannot be touched here, although it depend on both fact and law. The question of costs, which arises on the face of the report, is properly determinable here; but, as this is not a reference at common law, the right to costs does not depend on the submission or the special terms of the award, but on the statute of Gloucester.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

— It is impossible to distinguish this ease from Cunningham v. Irwin, 7 Serg. & Rawle, 247, and Gratz v. Phillips, 14 Serg. & Rawle, 144, in which a report of referees,' under the act of assembly of 1705, like á verdict, was held to be subject to the legal discretion of the- court. Here the question of interest being a question of damages, depending on the peculiar circumstances of the case, presents no point for the legitimate consideration of a court of error. But in Gratz v. Phillips, it was determined, that such a report cannot be touched here, although it depend on both fact and law. The question of costs, which arises on the face of the report, is properly determinable here; but, as this is not a reference at common law, the right to costs does not depend on the submission or the special terms of the award, but on the statute of Gloucester.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Rawle 21, 1829 Pa. LEXIS 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bellas-v-levy-pa-1829.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack