Boland v. County of Luzerne

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Boland v. County of Luzerne

40 A. 156, 186 Pa. 68, 1898 Pa. LEXIS 960

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMay 9, 1898

DocketAppeal, No. 121

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A. 156 (Boland v. County of Luzerne) 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

Boland v. County of Luzerne, 40 A. 156, 186 Pa. 68, 1898 Pa. LEXIS 960 (Pa. 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Cueiam,

The first fifteen specifications of error are to the action of the court below “in not sustaining” the therein recited exceptions taken by the defendant to the report of the learned referee.

Our consideration of the report, in connection with the evidence, has not convinced us that said exceptions were well taken, and hence they were rightly overruled. There appears to be nothing in any of them that requires discussion. We find no substantial error in either of the referee’s findings of fact or conclusions of law.

The only remaining specification, “ in directing judgment to be entered on the report in accordance with its findings,” cannot of course, be sustained. The entry of judgment was the logical sequence of the findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Pee Cueiam,

The first fifteen specifications of error are to the action of the court below “in not sustaining” the therein recited exceptions taken by the defendant to the report of the learned referee.

Our consideration of the report, in connection with the evidence, has not convinced us that said exceptions were well taken, and hence they were rightly overruled. There appears to be nothing in any of them that requires discussion. We find no substantial error in either of the referee’s findings of fact or conclusions of law.

The only remaining specification, “ in directing judgment to be entered on the report in accordance with its findings,” cannot of course, be sustained. The entry of judgment was the logical sequence of the findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A. 156, 186 Pa. 68, 1898 Pa. LEXIS 960, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boland-v-county-of-luzerne-pa-1898.