Newhoff v. Rochester

66 Pa. Super. 297, 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 249
CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMarch 16, 1917
DocketAppeal, No. 194
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 66 Pa. Super. 297 (Newhoff v. Rochester) 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
Newhoff v. Rochester, 66 Pa. Super. 297, 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 249 (Pa. Ct. App. 1917).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The only assignment presented is that the court erred in discharging the appellant’s rule for judgment on the appellee’s answer to interrogatories.

The opinion filed by Audeneied, J., is a convincing answer to the appellant’s argument, and for the reasons given in discharging the rule, the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Stalwart B. & L. Ass'n v. Borbeck
191 A. 204 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1936)
Bier v. Keer
70 Pa. Super. 570 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 Pa. Super. 297, 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newhoff-v-rochester-pasuperct-1917.