Gibbons v. Cochran

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Gibbons v. Cochran

32 Pa. Super. 185, 1906 Pa. Super. LEXIS 318

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided December 10, 1906·No. Appeals, Nos. 226 and 229·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The question raised upon these appeals has been considered and passed upon in Martin v. Greenwood, 27 Pa. Superior Ct. 245, Caner v. Bergner, 27 Pa. Superior Ct. 220, Oil City Building & Loan Association v. Shanfelter, 29 Pa. Superior Ct. 251, and as we remarked in the recent cases of Haspel v. O’Brien and Haspel v. Robinson, wherein we reconsidered the question, no useful purpose would be served by a further discussion of it by us.

The decree of distribution is affirmed, the costs of each of the above-mentioned appeals to be paid by the appellant therein.

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

Per Curiam,

The question raised upon these appeals has been considered and passed upon in Martin v. Greenwood, 27 Pa. Superior Ct. 245, Caner v. Bergner, 27 Pa. Superior Ct. 220, Oil City Building & Loan Association v. Shanfelter, 29 Pa. Superior Ct. 251, and as we remarked in the recent cases of Haspel v. O’Brien and Haspel v. Robinson, wherein we reconsidered the question, no useful purpose would be served by a further discussion of it by us.

The decree of distribution is affirmed, the costs of each of the above-mentioned appeals to be paid by the appellant therein.

Gibbons v. Cochran, 32 Pa. Super. 185, 1906 Pa. Super. LEXIS 318 (Pa. Ct. App. 1906).

Pincite

32 Pa. Super. 185 (Gibbons v. Cochran) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related