Hoppes v. Houtz
This text of 19 A. 312 (Hoppes v. Houtz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Schuylkill County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This appeal is a substitute for a certiorari and must be treated as such. It brings up nothing but the record. From it we learn that the proceeding below was an attachment under the act of 1869, and that the court dissolved it. The record does not show the ground upon which the attachment was dissolved. Nor is it material, as the order was interlocutory and not reviewable here. It was a matter within the discretion of the court below, and we have nothing before us to show that this discretion was abused.
Order affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
19 A. 312, 133 Pa. 34, 1890 Pa. LEXIS 866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoppes-v-houtz-pactcomplschuyl-1890.