Bowlby v. Thunder

3 A. 588, 2 Sadler 191
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 5, 1886·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

We see no error in the admission, nor in the rejection, of evidence. The alterations in the dates were sufficiently noted on the deed to make it proper evidence; and no sufficient evidence was given or offered to change its effect.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Bowlby v. Thunder, 3 A. 588, 2 Sadler 191 (Pa. 1886).

3 A. 588 (Bowlby v. Thunder) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ipser v. Kessler
3 Pelt. 142 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1919)
Carriere v. Morris Building & Land Improvement Ass'n
10 Teiss. 153 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1913)
Thoms v. Sewell
30 La. Ann. 359 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1878)