Court Opinion

ID: 9764191
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 03:14:03.730039+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:29:54.551017
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Manderino:
I dissent. Walter Guro, in his lifetime, began a lawsuit against Mary Ellen H. Simpson. Guro, in the lawsuit, challenged an alleged gift to Simpson. After Guro’s death, his executor represented Guro’s interests in the lawsuit. The majority states that the alleged donee represents the decedent’s interests in the very lawsuit began by the decedent against the donee. To say under such circumstances that the alleged donee now represents the interests of the decedent—the very person who brought suit against the donee challenging the gift—is prima facie unreasonable. In this case testimony by the executor should not have been barred under the Act of May 23, 1887, P. L. 158, 28 P.S. 322. The decree should be reversed and a new trial granted.