Given v. Rettew

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Given v. Rettew

29 A. 703, 162 Pa. 638, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 1034

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJuly 11, 1894

DocketAppeal, No. 35

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 29 A. 703 (Given v. Rettew) 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

Given v. Rettew, 29 A. 703, 162 Pa. 638, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 1034 (Pa. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Our examination of this record discloses no substantial error in the court’s findings of fact or conclusions of law. In the latter, it is virtually held, inter alia, that the policy executed by the company and accepted by the defendant was non-assessable and defendant having paid all that was required by the terms of his contract, neither the company nor the receiver had any further claim on him. This conclusion, we think, was fully warranted, and is of itself conclusive of defendant’s right to judgment. These and other questions presented by the specifications of error have been so fully considered by the learned trial judge that little, if anything, can be added to what has been so well said in his opinion, and, for reasons there given at length, we think the judgment should be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed on the opinion of the court below.

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

Per Curiam,

Our examination of this record discloses no substantial error in the court’s findings of fact or conclusions of law. In the latter, it is virtually held, inter alia, that the policy executed by the company and accepted by the defendant was non-assessable and defendant having paid all that was required by the terms of his contract, neither the company nor the receiver had any further claim on him. This conclusion, we think, was fully warranted, and is of itself conclusive of defendant’s right to judgment. These and other questions presented by the specifications of error have been so fully considered by the learned trial judge that little, if anything, can be added to what has been so well said in his opinion, and, for reasons there given at length, we think the judgment should be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed on the opinion of the court below.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A. 703, 162 Pa. 638, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 1034, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/given-v-rettew-pa-1894.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack