Hughes's Administrator v. Peaslee

50 Pa. 257
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided July 1, 1865·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The parties agreed to submit their case to- Judge Graham, to decide it upon depositions and admitted facts,” that are not certified to us under any bill of exceptions, and of which therefore we can take no notice. Nor did the submission stipulate for a writ of error by either party.

Such a submission was an expeditious and convenient mode of settling the disputes of the parties, and another great merit of it is that it was final. No writ of error lies to such an award of a referee ; and no bill of exceptions was or could be sealed by the referee to place the evidence before us.

The writ is quashed.

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

Hughes's Administrator v. Peaslee, 50 Pa. 257 (Pa. 1865).

50 Pa. 257 (Hughes's Administrator v. Peaslee) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Zimmerman & Co. v. Somerset Mutual Fire Insurance
91 Pa. Super. 421 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1927)
Citizens Bank v. Lesko
120 A. 808 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1923)
Pinkney v. Erie R. R.
109 A. 700 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1920)