Snyder v. Schmick

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Snyder v. Schmick

31 A. 124, 166 Pa. 429, 1895 Pa. LEXIS 1222

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedFebruary 25, 1895

DocketAppeal, No. 49

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 31 A. 124 (Snyder v. Schmick) 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

Snyder v. Schmick, 31 A. 124, 166 Pa. 429, 1895 Pa. LEXIS 1222 (Pa. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

We find nothing in this record that would have justified the rejection of defendant’s claim to the $300 exemption, either on the ground that it was too late, or for other reasons suggested by plaintiff’s exceptions thereto. The sale was not delayed, nor were costs incurred that might have been avoided bj^ an earlier presentation of the claim. There was therefore no error in dismissing the exceptions and discharging the rule to set aside the appraisement. The questions presented by plaintiff’s exceptions have been sufficiently considered and properly disposed of in the opinion of the court below. For reasons there given the decree should not be disturbed.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed with costs to be paid by appellant.

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

Per Curiam,

We find nothing in this record that would have justified the rejection of defendant’s claim to the $300 exemption, either on the ground that it was too late, or for other reasons suggested by plaintiff’s exceptions thereto. The sale was not delayed, nor were costs incurred that might have been avoided bj^ an earlier presentation of the claim. There was therefore no error in dismissing the exceptions and discharging the rule to set aside the appraisement. The questions presented by plaintiff’s exceptions have been sufficiently considered and properly disposed of in the opinion of the court below. For reasons there given the decree should not be disturbed.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed with costs to be paid by appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A. 124, 166 Pa. 429, 1895 Pa. LEXIS 1222, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/snyder-v-schmick-pa-1895.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack