Bierly v. Sener

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Bierly v. Sener

77 A. 441, 228 Pa. 289, 1910 Pa. LEXIS 478

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMay 16, 1910

DocketAppeal, No. 366

StatusPublished

This text of 77 A. 441 (Bierly v. Sener) 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

Bierly v. Sener, 77 A. 441, 228 Pa. 289, 1910 Pa. LEXIS 478 (Pa. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This bill was for the declaration of a trust as to real estate, an accounting and a reconveyance. The plaintiff’s case rested entirely upon a writing alleged by him to have been signed by the defendant. All of the material allegations of the bill were denied in the answer and it was found by the court that the testimony produced by the plaintiff was wholly insufficient in character, clearness and credibility to overcome the effect of the answer and to establish a trust relation. If this finding stands it is conclusive against the plaintiff. It must stand unless clearly shown to be erroneous. It has been repeatedly said that a finding of fact by the court, from disputed testimony, will not be set aside unless error is manifest. The finding in this case was the result of a painstaking and intelligent effort to arrive at the truth and we find no reason to doubt its correctness.

The decree dismissing the bill is affirmed at the plaintiff’s cost.

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

Per Curiam,

This bill was for the declaration of a trust as to real estate, an accounting and a reconveyance. The plaintiff’s case rested entirely upon a writing alleged by him to have been signed by the defendant. All of the material allegations of the bill were denied in the answer and it was found by the court that the testimony produced by the plaintiff was wholly insufficient in character, clearness and credibility to overcome the effect of the answer and to establish a trust relation. If this finding stands it is conclusive against the plaintiff. It must stand unless clearly shown to be erroneous. It has been repeatedly said that a finding of fact by the court, from disputed testimony, will not be set aside unless error is manifest. The finding in this case was the result of a painstaking and intelligent effort to arrive at the truth and we find no reason to doubt its correctness.

The decree dismissing the bill is affirmed at the plaintiff’s cost.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

77 A. 441, 228 Pa. 289, 1910 Pa. LEXIS 478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bierly-v-sener-pa-1910.