Frazer v. Linton

38 A. 589, 183 Pa. 186, 1897 Pa. LEXIS 735
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided November 8, 1897·No. Appeal, No. 21·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Pee Cueiam,

We find no error in the decree, or in the rulings of the court leading up thereto. The defendant’s offer, covered by the last specification, was rightly excluded for the reason that the proposed testimony was incompetent. On the facts, properly found by the court, there was no error in affirming the points quoted in the first three specifications, or in entering the decree set out at length in the fourth specification.

There is nothing in any of the questions presented by the record that requires, discussion.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at appellant’s costs.

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

Frazer v. Linton, 38 A. 589, 183 Pa. 186, 1897 Pa. LEXIS 735 (Pa. 1897).

38 A. 589 (Frazer v. Linton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dexter & Carpenter, Inc. v. Houston
20 F.2d 647 (Fourth Circuit, 1927)
Hoge v. George
200 P. 96 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1921)
Haswell v. Standring
132 N.W. 417 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1911)
Tuller v. Swift
129 N.W. 572 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1911)
Ewers v. Montgomery
69 S.E. 907 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1910)
Clark v. Emery
52 S.E. 770 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1906)