Simmons v. Simmons

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Simmons v. Simmons

29 A.2d 677, 346 Pa. 52, 1943 Pa. LEXIS 274

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedDecember 2, 1942

DocketAppeals, 285 and 286

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 29 A.2d 677 (Simmons v. Simmons) 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

Simmons v. Simmons, 29 A.2d 677, 346 Pa. 52, 1943 Pa. LEXIS 274 (Pa. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

These appeals to the Superior Court, one from the Common Pleas of Luzerne County, the other from the Common Pleas of Clearfield County, were certified to this court pursuant to section 10 of the Act of June 24, 1895, P. L. 212, 17 PS sections 197, 198. In the certificate it was stated that “the same legal question is involved in both of the above appeals.”

In the first case, an opinion reversing the judgment appealed from was written by President Judge Keller, from which Judges Kenworthey and Rhodes dissented. In the second, affirming the judgment appealed from, the opinion was written by Judge Hirt, Judge Rhodes dissenting.

The question for decision was stated by President Judge Keller to be: “Where land, subject to a valid judgment, is conveyed by deed, which is at once recorded, does the lien of the judgment bind the land in the possession of the terre-tenant for a period of five years from the date of the recording of the deed, even though the judgment was not subsequently revived against the judgment debtor by scire facias within five years of the entry of the judgment?” The question was answered in the affirmative.

We adopt the judgment of the Superior Court rendered in each of the cases.

Judgments affirmed.

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

Per Curiam,

These appeals to the Superior Court, one from the Common Pleas of Luzerne County, the other from the Common Pleas of Clearfield County, were certified to this court pursuant to section 10 of the Act of June 24, 1895, P. L. 212, 17 PS sections 197, 198. In the certificate it was stated that “the same legal question is involved in both of the above appeals.”

In the first case, an opinion reversing the judgment appealed from was written by President Judge Keller, from which Judges Kenworthey and Rhodes dissented. In the second, affirming the judgment appealed from, the opinion was written by Judge Hirt, Judge Rhodes dissenting.

The question for decision was stated by President Judge Keller to be: “Where land, subject to a valid judgment, is conveyed by deed, which is at once recorded, does the lien of the judgment bind the land in the possession of the terre-tenant for a period of five years from the date of the recording of the deed, even though the judgment was not subsequently revived against the judgment debtor by scire facias within five years of the entry of the judgment?” The question was answered in the affirmative.

We adopt the judgment of the Superior Court rendered in each of the cases.

Judgments affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.2d 677, 346 Pa. 52, 1943 Pa. LEXIS 274, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simmons-v-simmons-pa-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack