Shinn v. Stemler

47 A.2d 294, 159 Pa. Super. 129, 1946 Pa. Super. LEXIS 336
CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedApril 22, 1946
DocketAppeal, 216
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 47 A.2d 294 (Shinn v. Stemler) 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
Shinn v. Stemler, 47 A.2d 294, 159 Pa. Super. 129, 1946 Pa. Super. LEXIS 336 (Pa. Ct. App. 1946).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This appeal is by defendant from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County making absolute citation for possession of real estate and entering judgment for petitioner.

Plaintiffs obtained a judgment against defendant, and after levy of execution against defendant’s real estate had been made defendant presented a petition to the court of common pleas to open the judgment. A rule was issued and an answer was filed. Upon rule being discharged on November 13,1944, defendant, on December 11,1944, without complying with the Act of May 19, 1897, P. L. 67, as amended, 12 PS § 1133 et seq., to make the appeal a supersedeas, appealed to this court (Shinn et al. v. Stemler, 158 Pa. Superior Ct. 350, 45 A. 2d 242). The question presented is whether that appeal nevertheless acted as a supersedeas. It did not. The Act of May 19,1897, P. L. 67, as amended, 12 PS § 1133 et seq., rules appeals on the question of supersedeas; and a supersedeas operates only in favor of those who ask for and have done those things necessary to obtain it. Drabant v. Cure, 280 Pa. 181, 187, 124 A. 340; Koenig v. Curran’s Restaurant & Baking Co. et al., 121 Pa. Superior Ct. 201, 205, 207, 183 A. 451.

We may add that the question is now moot. The validity of the judgment has been adjudicated. In Shinn et al. v. Stemler, supra, 158 Pa. Superior Ct. 350, 45 A. 2d 242 (allocatur refused by the Supreme Court), we affirmed the order of the court below in discharging the rule to open the judgment upon which the execution in question issued.

Judgment of the court below is affirmed, at the cost of appellant.

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

Related

Monroe County Children and Youth Services v. Werkheiser
598 A.2d 313 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1991)
Fiore v. Oakwood Plaza Shopping Center, Inc.
585 A.2d 1012 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1991)
Southern Fulton School District v. Hill
45 Pa. D. & C.2d 232 (Fulton County Court of Common Pleas, 1968)
Self Drive It Corp. Case
134 A.2d 662 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1957)
Kogen v. Horowitz
82 A.2d 530 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1951)
Shinn v. Stemler
61 A.2d 777 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1948)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
47 A.2d 294, 159 Pa. Super. 129, 1946 Pa. Super. LEXIS 336, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shinn-v-stemler-pasuperct-1946.