Rishel v. Crouse

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Rishel v. Crouse

29 A. 123, 162 Pa. 3, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 932

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMay 21, 1894

DocketAppeal, No. 75

StatusPublished

Cited by13 cases

This text of 29 A. 123 (Rishel v. Crouse) 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.

Bluebook

Rishel v. Crouse, 29 A. 123, 162 Pa. 3, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 932 (Pa. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The learned judge of the court below filed no less than three opinions upon the several applications of the defendant to have this judgment opened and to have rehearings. We have examined patiently the testimony given on both sides and are constrained to say, not only that we do not think it a proper case in which to interfere with the discretion of the court bellow, but also that we fully approve of all that was done by the [9]*9learned court. The testimony given in the attempt to impeach the judgment was entirely too unsubstantial and infirm in character to warrant any interference with it, and the testimony given in its support convinces us that there was ample money consideration for it.

The order of the court below is affirmed and the appeal dismissed at the cost of the appellant.

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

Per Curiam,

The learned judge of the court below filed no less than three opinions upon the several applications of the defendant to have this judgment opened and to have rehearings. We have examined patiently the testimony given on both sides and are constrained to say, not only that we do not think it a proper case in which to interfere with the discretion of the court bellow, but also that we fully approve of all that was done by the [9]*9learned court. The testimony given in the attempt to impeach the judgment was entirely too unsubstantial and infirm in character to warrant any interference with it, and the testimony given in its support convinces us that there was ample money consideration for it.

The order of the court below is affirmed and the appeal dismissed at the cost of the appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A. 123, 162 Pa. 3, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 932, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rishel-v-crouse-pa-1894.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack