Ritter v. Preferred Masonic Mutual Accident Ass'n of America
39 A. 1117, 185 Pa. 90, 1898 Pa. LEXIS 674
Opinion
This case was carefully and correctly tried. We find nothing in the record that would justify us in sustaining either of the specifications of error; nor do we think that any of them . requires special notice.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Ritter v. Preferred Masonic Mutual Accident Ass'n of America, 39 A. 1117, 185 Pa. 90, 1898 Pa. LEXIS 674 (Pa. 1898).
39 A. 1117 (Ritter v. Preferred Masonic Mutual Accident Ass'n of America) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Tennant v. Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection & Insurance
40 A.2d 385 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1944)
Bova v. Wyman Chemical Co.
50 Pa. D. & C. 651 (McKean County Court of Common Pleas, 1944)
Spencer v. Blanck's Transfer & Storage Co.
45 Pa. D. & C. 253 (Adams County Court of Common Pleas, 1942)
Scull v. Blosinski
43 Pa. D. & C. 428 (Delaware County Court of Common Pleas, 1941)
O'Brien v. Wise Upson Co., Inc.
143 A. 155 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1928)
United States Casualty Co. v. Perryman
82 So. 462 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1919)
Continental Casualty Co. v. Ogburn
57 So. 852 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1911)
Farner v. Massachusetts Mutual Accident Ass'n
67 A. 927 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1907)