Commonwealth ex rel. Wilde v. Pennsylvania Silk Co.

110 A. 157, 267 Pa. 331, 1920 Pa. LEXIS 857
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 19, 1920·No. No. 1; Appeal, No. 230·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The judgment in this case was entered on relator’s demurrer to the answer of respondents to the petition [336] for the writ of mandamus, and it is affirmed, except as to Harvey D. P. Dietrich, on the clear opinion of the learned president judge of the court below, in pursuance of which it was entered.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Commonwealth ex rel. Wilde v. Pennsylvania Silk Co., 110 A. 157, 267 Pa. 331, 1920 Pa. LEXIS 857 (Pa. 1920).

110 A. 157 (Commonwealth ex rel. Wilde v. Pennsylvania Silk Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Donaldson v. Boston Herald-Traveler Corp.
197 N.E.2d 671 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1964)
Durnin v. Allentown Federal Savings and Loan Ass'n.
218 F. Supp. 716 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1963)
Strassburger v. Philadelphia Record Co.
6 A.2d 922 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1939)
Perlberg v. Union Bk. Tr. Co. of Phila.
6 A.2d 563 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1939)
Osmond v. Sanitary Co. of America
21 Pa. D. & C. 24 (Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, 1934)
Muro v. Elwood Becker Building & Loan Ass'n
20 Pa. D. & C. 510 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1934)
Conerty v. Butler County Oil Refining Co.
152 A. 672 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1930)
Hauser v. York Water Co.
123 A. 330 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1924)
Hauser v. York Water Co.
4 Pa. D. & C. 163 (York County Court of Common Pleas, 1923)