Nes v. Ramsay

26 A. 770, 155 Pa. 628, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1296
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 31, 1893·No. Appeal, No. 28·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The facts agreed upon, including the clauses of the respective wills of A. Hamilton Nes, and Catharine E. Nes, deeds of William J. Nes to Eliza Nes, etc., upon which the questions in dispute arose, are fully set forth in the case stated. An examination of the record has satisfied us that the questions thus presented for the decision of the court below were rightly disposed of, and hence there was no error in entering judgment on the case stated for the defendant.

For reasons given in the opinion of the learned judge of the common pleas the judgment should be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Nes v. Ramsay, 26 A. 770, 155 Pa. 628, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1296 (Pa. 1893).

26 A. 770 (Nes v. Ramsay) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jones v. Gulf Refining Co.
10 Pa. D. & C. 353 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1928)
Beckley v. Riegert
61 A. 641 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1905)
Crandell v. Barker
78 N.W. 347 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1898)