Case ID: pa_175/html/0623-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice McCollum,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Nathaniel Burt and Thomas M. Locke, Receivers, v. The Real Estate Exchange of Philadelphia, George H. Becker, George W. Carson, Henry Clay, William C. Stoever, Martin H. Stutzbach et al. Martin Stutzbach’s Appeal.
    May 28, 1896:
    Argued Jan. 6, 1896.
    Appeal, No. 394, Jan. T., 1894, by Martin H. Stutzbach, from decree of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1890, No. 353, on bill in equity.
    Before Steerett, C. J., Green, Williams, McCollum, Mitchell, Dean and Fell, JJ.
    Affirmed.
   Opinion by

Mr. Justice McCollum,

It is impossible to distinguish tins case from Stoever’s appeal from the same decree, just decided, supra, p. 619. For the reasons stated in the opinion filed in Stoever’s appeal the decree is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed at the cost of the appellant.