Slattery v. Sterling Hotel Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Slattery v. Sterling Hotel Co.

39 A.2d 161, 156 Pa. Super. 82, 1944 Pa. Super. LEXIS 521

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided September 27, 1944·No. Appeal, 19·Published

Opinion

‘Peb Curiam,

There is no substantial difference between the clause in the mortgage given by the defendant corporation, and relied on by it in this appeal, and the corresponding clause in the mortgage passed upon by the Supreme Court in Putnam v. Pittsburgh Railways Co., 330 Pa. 210, 199 A. 211. That decision justifies the action of the court below.

The judgment is affirmed on the opinion of Judge Aponick,

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

‘Peb Curiam,

There is no substantial difference between the clause in the mortgage given by the defendant corporation, and relied on by it in this appeal, and the corresponding clause in the mortgage passed upon by the Supreme Court in Putnam v. Pittsburgh Railways Co., 330 Pa. 210, 199 A. 211. That decision justifies the action of the court below.

The judgment is affirmed on the opinion of Judge Aponick,

Slattery v. Sterling Hotel Co., 39 A.2d 161, 156 Pa. Super. 82, 1944 Pa. Super. LEXIS 521 (Pa. Ct. App. 1944).

Pincite

39 A.2d 161 (Slattery v. Sterling Hotel Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related