Supler v. Sonntag
48 A.2d 66, 159 Pa. Super. 362, 1946 Pa. Super. LEXIS 376
Opinion
Opinion by
In this case tbe essential facts are substantially tbe same as in Powell v. Sonntag, 159 Pa. Superior Ct. 354, 48 A. 2d 462. Tbe testimony in each case, before tbe referee, was also offered in tbe companion case.
*363 For the reasons given in Powell v. Sonntag, supra, the order granting rehearing is reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Supler v. Sonntag, 48 A.2d 66, 159 Pa. Super. 362, 1946 Pa. Super. LEXIS 376 (Pa. Ct. App. 1946).
48 A.2d 66 (Supler v. Sonntag) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Commonwealth v. Waller
468 A.2d 1134 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1983)
Valerio v. Valerio
444 A.2d 1166 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1982)
Smith v. Chardak
435 A.2d 624 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1981)
Wiegand v. Wiegand
393 A.2d 722 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1978)
Melli v. Melli
384 A.2d 1347 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1978)
Cammann v. Cammann
272 A.2d 241 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1970)
Commonwealth v. Holloway
242 A.2d 918 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1968)
Decker v. Decker
160 A.2d 242 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1960)
Foley v. Foley
146 A.2d 328 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1958)
Larsen v. Larsen
141 A.2d 353 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1958)