Hook v. White

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Hook v. White

44 A. 1102, 193 Pa. 397, 1899 Pa. LEXIS 1134

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedOctober 30, 1899

DocketAppeal, No. 19

StatusPublished

This text of 44 A. 1102 (Hook v. White) 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

Hook v. White, 44 A. 1102, 193 Pa. 397, 1899 Pa. LEXIS 1134 (Pa. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This appeal is from the decree of the court below making absolute the rule to show cause why the judgment should not be opened as to William Blair and Mordecai Kent, two of the defendants therein.

In view of the evidence the learned judge of the common pleas was fully warranted in making the decree. It is unnecessary as well as improper at this time to review or discuss the testimony. That will be in order when the issue is tried before a jury.

Neither of the specifications is sustained. Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at appellants’ costs.

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

Per Curiam,

This appeal is from the decree of the court below making absolute the rule to show cause why the judgment should not be opened as to William Blair and Mordecai Kent, two of the defendants therein.

In view of the evidence the learned judge of the common pleas was fully warranted in making the decree. It is unnecessary as well as improper at this time to review or discuss the testimony. That will be in order when the issue is tried before a jury.

Neither of the specifications is sustained. Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at appellants’ costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 A. 1102, 193 Pa. 397, 1899 Pa. LEXIS 1134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hook-v-white-pa-1899.