Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

130 Pa. Super. 122

196 A 570

Shank v. Shank

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 17, 1937

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1937-11-17

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently November 1976

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1937-11-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 Dissenting Opinion by

Kellek, P. J.:

¶2 The decree in this case rests wholly on the testimony of two prurient-minded boys. The story told by them *127 is not only improbable, in view of all the attending circumstances, but, in ¡my opinion, it is impossible that they conld have seen what they alleged they saw by looking up through a small round hole in the floor directly over their heads and several feet above them. It simply could not have been done.

¶3 The master, an experienced trial lawyer, who saw and heard them testify, did not believe them; neither do I.

¶4 I would sustain the master and dismiss the libel.

Judge James and Judge Rhodes concur in this dissent.
/130/pasuper/122 · .json · Public domain