Phillips v. Wilson

30 A. 264, 164 Pa. 350, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 1079
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided October 15, 1894·No. Appeal, No. 73·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

'Phis appeal is destitute of merit. Instead of showing such abuse-of judicial discretion,—on the.part of the court below, in [352] setting aside the sheriff’s sale in question,—as would justify our interference, the record shows quite the contrary. From what appears therein, we are satisfied that, in making absolute the rule to show cause why the sale should not be set aside, the learned court acted within the lines of sound judicial discretion. Further comment is unnecessary. The correctness of the decree complained of is sufficiently vindicated in the opinion filed at the instance of appellant’s counsel and sent up with the record.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed with costs to be paid by appellants.

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

Phillips v. Wilson, 30 A. 264, 164 Pa. 350, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 1079 (Pa. 1894).

30 A. 264 (Phillips v. Wilson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Western Saving Fund Society v. Stevenson
39 Pa. D. & C. 478 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1940)
Morelli State Bank v. Deolio
10 Pa. D. & C. 173 (Washington County Court of Common Pleas, 1927)
Weaver v. Henninger
1 Pa. D. & C. 167 (Bucks County Court of Common Pleas, 1921)
H. T. Cottam & Co. v. Moises
4 Pelt. 252 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1921)
Schwartz v. Manfre
2 Pelt. 122 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1919)
Milam-Morgan Co. v. Atlantic Fruit Co.
12 Teiss. 306 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1915)
Shipley v. Shamwell
41 App. D.C. 267 (D.C. Circuit, 1914)
Haspel v. Lyons
41 Pa. Super. 285 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1909)
Barnes v. Skiles
30 Pa. Super. 418 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1906)
Appeal of Laird
2 Pa. Super. 300 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1896)