Montour American. (Danville, Pa.) 1866-1920, 1907-08-15
COURT Hands
down OPINIONS

couple of opinious involving cases of
considerable interest, one of which has
been before court for over two years.
The latter case in which a number
of our leading citizens are directly in
terested relates to a change of road in
Limestone township, the opinion of
court being upon exceptions to report
of viewers. The report is set aside, the
proceedings, the opinion states, having
been apparently conducted without ref
erence to statutory requirements.
In effect the petition represents that
public road was long since laid out
and opened leading from Limestone
vile to California, Limestone town
ship; that part of said road begin
ming at point at or near the corner
of lands of Clark Benield, w. J. Baldy
and Abram Wagner and ending at
point at the corner of lands of said
CLARK Benfield and Elizabeth Latimer
has become burdensome and that said
road would be much improved by
change of its route between said
points. The petition is signed by G.
d. Levan and twelve other persons.
The following endorsement appears
on the back of the petition:
March 4 1905. Filed, Viewers APP
pointed. Hiram Sandel, William E.
Boyer and James +. Ellis.
(Signed) Frank G. Blee, A. j."
The two associate judges in coun-
ties chat are not separate judicial dis
tricts may legally hold court in the
absence of the president Judge; but
neither of the associate judges can
hold court alone in the absence of the
president judge.
By permission of the court excep-
tions were permitted to be filed to the
final confirmation of viewers within
fifteen days from February 25, 1907.
The county commissioner on the
second day of March, 1907, filed seven.
teen exceptions to the final confirma-
tion of the said report. Exceptions
were also filed by Alexander Billmey-
er.
From examination of the record pap
er the court finds the following facts
81. That the viewers were appoint
ed by the order of one of the associate
judges.
SO. That it nowhere appears on the
face of the petition, the base of pro-
oeedings, that the persons signing the
same we're residents of Limestone
township, of the county of Montour,
nor even of the State of Pennsylvania.
50. The petition fails to set forth
how the portion of the road proposed
to be vacated became public road or
was laid out.
~ The petition fails to set forth
any reason why the road proposed to
be vacated has become useless, in
convenient and burdensome.
IS. The report of the viewers fails
to set forth that written notice of the
time and place for holding the view
was served on the supervisors of Lime
stone township.
1.-THE report is accordingly set aside.
By the court
CHARLES @. EVANS, P. j."
The second opinion relates to the
case of E. S. Gearhart, Executor &c.
VS. James B. Forrest. Assumpsit.
Joseph Hartman late of Danville,
died on November %, 1892 testate In
his will he bequeathed to his two sis
ters, Jane O. Hartman and Frances
Hartman, all his property, to be divid-
ed equally between them, providing
that IN case either of them should die
the survivor should inherit the entire
estate.
The plaintiffs contention is that the
will of Joseph Hartman vested one.
half of his entire estate in each of his
two sisters, both of whom survived
him absolutely and that the period of
survivorship as therein fixed referred
solely to Joseph Hartman's own death
and not to the death of either of his
sisters.
The defendants contention, on the
other hand, is that the period Of sur
vivorship refers to the death of either
of the said sisters and not to the period
of Joseph Hartman's own death.
The opinion handed down cites auth
critics to show that in such cases the
gift is absolute unless the person
named in the will Gle in the testator's S
lifetime. death generally is not
meant, but death in the lifetime of the
testator.' ~
The court, therefore, ordered judg-
ment to be entered in favor of the
plaintiff for the sum Of 5000 with in
terest from May 80, 1907.
CamnIuu af Doarif1U Creak