Case ID: pa-super_156/html/0082-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "‘Peb Curiam,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Slattery v. Sterling Hotel Company, Appellant.
    Argued September 27, 1944.
    Before Keller, P. J., Baldrige, Rhodes, Hirt, Reno and James, JJ.
    
      
      Robert J. Doran, with him Reynolds & Reynolds, for appellant.
    
      Frank P. Slattery, for appellees.
    September 29, 1944:
   ‘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,