Case Name: Eppsteiner, Appellant, v. Isman
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1913-02-24
Citations: 239 Pa. 393
Docket Number: Appeal, No. 380
Parties: Eppsteiner, Appellant, v. Isman.
Judges: Before Fell, C. J., Mestrezat, Potter, Elkin and Stewart, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania State Reports
Volume: 239
Pages: 393–394

Head Matter:
Eppsteiner, Appellant, v. Isman.
Equity — Findings of fact — Appeals.
Findings of fact by a judge which involve the credibility of witnesses, and the weight to be given their testimony, will be given the effect of a verdict of a jury and will not be disturbed where there is testimony to support them.
Argued Jan. 16, 1913.
Appeal, No. 380, Jan. T., 1912, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. No. 4, Philadelphia Co., March T., 1911, No. 5212, In Equity, dismissing bill in case of Leo Eppsteiner v. Felix Isman, Incorporated.
Before Fell, C. J., Mestrezat, Potter, Elkin and Stewart, JJ.
Affirmed.
Bill in equity to rescind contract for sale of real estate. Before Audenried, J.
The facts are stated in the opinion of "the Supreme Court.
The court made a decree dismissing the hill. Plaintiff appealed.
Error assigned was the decree of the court dismissing the bill.
Stanley Folz, with him Leon E. Folz, for appellant.
Morris Wolf, with him Horace Stern, for appellee.
February 24, 1913:

Opinion:
Per Curiam,
This appeal is from a decree dismissing a bill to rescind a contract for the sale of real estate by the defendant to the plaintiff and to require a return of the consideration to him on his making a reconveyance.
The relief sought by the bill was based upon the allegation that fraudulent representations of fact were made by the defendant's agent in the course of the negotiations which led to the sale. The learned trial judge, on a careful review of the testimony, found that the representations alleged to have been made were not in fact made. This finding is conclusive of the plaintiff's right unless shown to be erroneous. This has not been done. The findings of fact by a judge, which involve the credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony, will be given the effect of a verdict of a jury and they will not be disturbed where there is testimony to support them.
The decree is affirmed at the cost of the appellant.