Kintzel v. Kintzel

Lebanon County Court of Common Pleas

Kintzel v. Kintzel

133 Pa. 71, 1890 Pa. LEXIS 874

Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lebanon County·Decided March 3, 1890·No. No. 240·Published

Opinion

Pm Curiam:

The question whether the judgment No. 42 November Term 1886, confessed by Henry D. Kintzel to Mary Kintzel, was collusive, and intended to delay and defraud the creditors of said Henry, has been settled in favor of the integrity of the [77] judgment by tbe finding of the auditor, approved by the learned court below. It needs no argument to show that the declarations of Henry D. Kintzel, made in the absence of the said Mary Kintzel, as to the consideration of the judgment, were inadmissible to affect the latter. The assignments of error do not raise any question as to interest upon the arrears of dower.

The decree is affirmed, and the appeal dismissed, at the costs of the appellants.

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

Pm Curiam:

The question whether the judgment No. 42 November Term 1886, confessed by Henry D. Kintzel to Mary Kintzel, was collusive, and intended to delay and defraud the creditors of said Henry, has been settled in favor of the integrity of the [77] judgment by tbe finding of the auditor, approved by the learned court below. It needs no argument to show that the declarations of Henry D. Kintzel, made in the absence of the said Mary Kintzel, as to the consideration of the judgment, were inadmissible to affect the latter. The assignments of error do not raise any question as to interest upon the arrears of dower.

The decree is affirmed, and the appeal dismissed, at the costs of the appellants.

Kintzel v. Kintzel, 133 Pa. 71, 1890 Pa. LEXIS 874 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1890).

Pincite

133 Pa. 71 (Kintzel v. Kintzel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.