Opinion · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Heist v. Blaisdell
198 Pa. 377
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- Jurisdiction
- Pennsylvania
- Date
- 1901-02-18
- Topic
- bankruptcy
Per Curiam, A careful perusal of all the testimony in the case, of the charge of the court and of the numerous specifications of error, has not disclosed adequate cause for setting aside the judgment and verdict and ordering a new trial. We therefore dismiss the twenty-five specifications of error and affirm the judgment entered by the learned court below. Judgment affirmed.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Heist v. Blaisdell. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 3 opinions
A careful perusal of all the testimony in the case, of the charge of the court and of the numerous specifications of error, has not disclosed adequate cause for setting aside the judgment and verdict and ordering a new trial. We therefore dismiss the twenty-five specifications of error and affirm the judgment entered by the learned court below.
Judgment affirmed.