McConaghy v. Pemberton & Co.
31 A. 996, 168 Pa. 121, 1895 Pa. LEXIS 767
Opinion
The very able argument of the learned counsel for the appellants has failed to convince us of any error in the report of the referee. His report is so well sustained by the treatment he has given of the questions at issue that after a most patient and attentive reading of it in connection with the arguments of counsel, we have reached the conclusion to affirm the judgment upon the findings and conclusions contained in the report.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
McConaghy v. Pemberton & Co., 31 A. 996, 168 Pa. 121, 1895 Pa. LEXIS 767 (Pa. 1895).
31 A. 996 (McConaghy v. Pemberton & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Miller v. Stimpson
20 Pa. D. & C.3d 31 (Adams County Court of Common Pleas, 1981)
Trachtenburg v. Sibarco Stations, Inc.
384 A.2d 1209 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1978)
Dairymen's Co-Operative Sales Ass'n v. McCreary
1 A.2d 508 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1938)
Christopher & Simpson Architectural Iron & Foundry Co. v. E. A. Steininger Construction Co.
205 S.W. 278 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1918)
Bricker v. Conemaugh Stone Co.
32 Pa. Super. 283 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1907)