Hall v. Oyster
This text of 31 A. 1007 (Hall v. Oyster) 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.
Opinion
This so called appeal is in fact merely a certiorari, and must [401]*401be so treated. It brings up for review nothing but the record proper, which does not include the evidence on which the court acted in dissolving the attachment. Under the act of 1869, that action of the court below-was a matter within its discretion, and we have nothing before us to show that the discretion was abused: Wetherald v. Shupe, 109 Pa. 389; Black v. Oblander, 15 Atl. Rep. 708; Hoppes v. Houtz, 133 Pa. 34.
Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed with costs to be paid by appellants.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
31 A. 1007, 168 Pa. 399, 1895 Pa. LEXIS 810, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hall-v-oyster-pa-1895.