Griesmer v. Hill

36 Pa. Super. 69, 1908 Pa. Super. LEXIS 114
Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 20, 1908·No. Appeal, No. 30·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The question raised by this appeal was well worthy of consideration. It has received such consideration in the opinion filed by the learned judge below, and while there is much plausibility in the argument presented by appellant’s counsel in support of their position, we are nevertheless led to conclude that the court below properly construed the statute as entitling the plaintiff, to a judgment at the time it was entered. The reasons for this conclusion are fully and clearly set f.orth in the .opinion of the learned judge, in which we concur.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Griesmer v. Hill, 36 Pa. Super. 69, 1908 Pa. Super. LEXIS 114 (Pa. Ct. App. 1908).

36 Pa. Super. 69 (Griesmer v. Hill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Benner v. Underkoffler
30 Pa. D. & C. 275 (Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas, 1937)
Kelvinator Sales Co. v. Har
15 Pa. D. & C. 399 (Berks County Court of Common Pleas, 1930)