Siegel v. Megraw

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Siegel v. Megraw

81 A. 84, 232 Pa. 13, 1911 Pa. LEXIS 667

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMay 17, 1911

DocketAppeal, No. 381

StatusPublished

This text of 81 A. 84 (Siegel v. Megraw) 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

Siegel v. Megraw, 81 A. 84, 232 Pa. 13, 1911 Pa. LEXIS 667 (Pa. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The learned judges of the common pleas carefully considered the testimony in support of the rule to show cause [14]*14why the report of the arbitrators should not be set aside, and found that the allegations of misconduct were not sustained. This finding appears to be fully sustained by the testimony. Nothing short of clear error would warrant us in disturbing it.

The order of the court discharging the rule is affirmed 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 judges of the common pleas carefully considered the testimony in support of the rule to show cause [14]*14why the report of the arbitrators should not be set aside, and found that the allegations of misconduct were not sustained. This finding appears to be fully sustained by the testimony. Nothing short of clear error would warrant us in disturbing it.

The order of the court discharging the rule is affirmed at the cost of the appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 A. 84, 232 Pa. 13, 1911 Pa. LEXIS 667, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/siegel-v-megraw-pa-1911.