Romig's Appeal

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Romig's Appeal

8 Watts 415

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided July 15, 1839·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Of a part of the premises named in the writ and inquisition, the orphans’ court had not jurisdiction. The proper course, to divide the estate of an intestate tenant in common, was pointed out in Feather a. Strohœcker, 3 Penn. Rep. 505, and ought .to have been pursued here; for the consent of the other tenant in [416]*416common could not give the orphans’ court a jurisdiction which the legislature had withheld from it. As then we cannot, quash the writ and inquisition in part, the whole must be quashed.

Proceedings quashed.

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

Per Curiam.

Of a part of the premises named in the writ and inquisition, the orphans’ court had not jurisdiction. The proper course, to divide the estate of an intestate tenant in common, was pointed out in Feather a. Strohœcker, 3 Penn. Rep. 505, and ought .to have been pursued here; for the consent of the other tenant in [416]*416common could not give the orphans’ court a jurisdiction which the legislature had withheld from it. As then we cannot, quash the writ and inquisition in part, the whole must be quashed.

Proceedings quashed.

Romig's Appeal, 8 Watts 415 (Pa. 1839).

Pincite

8 Watts 415 (Romig's Appeal) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related