Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

205 Pa. 377

Beatty v. Harris

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 20, 1903

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 1903-04-20

Appeal, No. 193, Jan. T., 1902, by defendants, from decree of C. P. Schuylkill Co., July T., 1900, No. 5, on bill in equity in case of J. M. Beatty et al. v. J. M. Harris et al. Bill in equity for an account. Motion to quash appeal. From the record it appeared that Mark, J., filed an adjudication, and a decree based thereon. No exceptions were filed to the adjudication or the decree. Errors assigned were different paragraphs of the decree, quoting them.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Appeal quashed · Decided 1903-04-20

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 1927

6 state decisions

20190319101920decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Opinion by

Mb.. Justice Fell,

¶2The motion to quash the appeal must be granted for the reason that no exceptions were filed in the common pleas to the decree entered, and there is nothing on the record to support the assignments of error. The rules of equity practice provide for the entering of a decree nisi, the filing of exceptions thereto by either party, the entering of a formal decree by the prothonotary, as of course, if no exceptions are filed; and if exceptions are filed, for the hearing of them on the argument list as upon a rule for a new trial. They expressly direct that the exceptions filed shall cover all objections to rulings on evidence, findings of fact or law, and to the decree of the court; the power is given the judge or the court in banc to sustain or dismiss exceptions, and to confirm, modify or change the decree entered. Rule 67 is as'follows : “ Upon appeal to the Supreme or Superior Court such matters only as have been so excepted to and finally passed upon by the court, shall be assignable for error.” The object of these rules is to afford an opportunity for a careful review of the rulings made at the trial and of the findings of the court. The rules are mandatory, and their violation cannot be overlooked.

¶3The appeal is quashed at the cost of the appellant.

/205/pa/377 · .json · Public domain