Neely's Case

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Neely's Case

11 A.2d 776, 139 Pa. Super. 412, 1940 Pa. Super. LEXIS 59

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMarch 15, 1940

DocketAppeal, 39

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 11 A.2d 776 (Neely's Case) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Neely's Case, 11 A.2d 776, 139 Pa. Super. 412, 1940 Pa. Super. LEXIS 59 (Pa. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This appeal from the decree of the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County raises the question whether the decree appealed from complies with the judgment and order of the Supreme Court in Commonwealth Trust Company Case, 331 Pa. 569, 1 A. 2d 662. Appellant contends that he is entitled to recover interest on the bonds of the Union Real Estate Investment Company up to the date of the actual payment of the money following the entry of the order by the lower court made pursuant to the judgment or decree of the Supreme Court, and to an allowance of additional compensation beyond that included in the $35,444.54 stipulated by the parties and referred to in the Supreme Court’s opinion. The matter is complicated by the fact that the Commonwealth Trust Company is in liquidation and the preferred rights of its depositors may be affected by a reversal of the lower court’s decree.

*414 In view of the admonition of the Supreme Court in Ladner v. Siegel, 296 Pa. 579, 587, 146 A. 710, we are of opinion that the circumstances require us to certify the appeal to the Supreme Court for its determination, in the light of its fuller knowledge of the issues involved in the original case and of its intentions as expressed in its judgment and order. See also, In re Estate of Crawford, 108 Pa. Superior Ct. 475, 165 A. 540; Crawford’s Est., 313 Pa. 127, 129, 169 A. 438.

Appeal certified to the Supreme Court.

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

Per Curiam,

This appeal from the decree of the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County raises the question whether the decree appealed from complies with the judgment and order of the Supreme Court in Commonwealth Trust Company Case, 331 Pa. 569, 1 A. 2d 662. Appellant contends that he is entitled to recover interest on the bonds of the Union Real Estate Investment Company up to the date of the actual payment of the money following the entry of the order by the lower court made pursuant to the judgment or decree of the Supreme Court, and to an allowance of additional compensation beyond that included in the $35,444.54 stipulated by the parties and referred to in the Supreme Court’s opinion. The matter is complicated by the fact that the Commonwealth Trust Company is in liquidation and the preferred rights of its depositors may be affected by a reversal of the lower court’s decree.

*414 In view of the admonition of the Supreme Court in Ladner v. Siegel, 296 Pa. 579, 587, 146 A. 710, we are of opinion that the circumstances require us to certify the appeal to the Supreme Court for its determination, in the light of its fuller knowledge of the issues involved in the original case and of its intentions as expressed in its judgment and order. See also, In re Estate of Crawford, 108 Pa. Superior Ct. 475, 165 A. 540; Crawford’s Est., 313 Pa. 127, 129, 169 A. 438.

Appeal certified to the Supreme Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.2d 776, 139 Pa. Super. 412, 1940 Pa. Super. LEXIS 59, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neelys-case-pasuperct-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack