Murphy v. Flood
This text of 2 Grant 411 (Murphy v. Flood) 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.
Opinion
The opinion of the court was delivered January 7, 1854, by
— The Statute of 13 Edward I., chap. 31, gives a bill of exceptions where a party is “ impleaded,” and it was decided more than forty years ago, that the statute does not extend to “ the opinion of the court, in receiving or rejecting evidence upon motions for summary relief.” It may be taken “ on the trial of an issue before a jury,” but it will not lie to every opinion of the court. The evidence taken on a motion for summary relief is, therefore, not judicially before a court of error, [412]*412and cannot be brought there, even if a bill of exceptions be sealed. Shortz v. Quigley, 1 Bin. 226. The power to entertain and decide upon motions for summary relief, is a necessary incident of jurisdiction. If an entry of satisfaction be made upon the record by mistake, by fraud, or by falsely personating the plaintiff, the court where the record is, has an undoubted right upon proof of the facts, on notice to the parties, to strike off such improper entry ; and its decision upon such evidence is the decision of a matter of fact, which is not the subject of review on writ of error.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2 Grant 411, 1854 Pa. LEXIS 250, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murphy-v-flood-pa-1854.