McCurdy v. Canning
| Decision Date | 10 January 1870 |
| Citation | 64 Pa. 39 |
| Parties | McCurdy and Stevenson <I>versus</I> Canning. |
| Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
Before THOMPSON, C. J., READ and SHARSWOOD, JJ. AGNEW, J., at Nisi Prius.
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia. No. 180, to July Term 1868.
A. Thompson and W. E. Whitman, for plaintiffs in error, cited Ash v. McGill, 6 Whart. 391; Stoebler v. Knerr, 5 Watts 181: Coulter v. Phillips, 8 Harris 154; Dougan v. Blocher, 12 Id. 28; Smith v. Painter, 5 S. & R. 222; Martin v. Jackson, 3 Casey 504; French v. Mehan, 6 P. F. Smith 286.
H. McIntyre, for defendant in error, cited Diver v. Diver, 6 P. F. Smith 106; Stuckey v. Keeffe, 2 Casey 402.
The opinion of the court was delivered, January 10th 1870, by
We affirm this judgment for the reasons so well assigned by the learned judge (Judge Thayer), in his able opinion in the court below.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ward Terry & Co. v. Hensen
...and can neither be disposed of nor charged without the joint act of both husband and wife, which seems to be the view taken in McCurdy v. Canning, 64 Pa. 39; or the parties become tenants in common or joint tenants of the use, each being entitled to one-half of the rents and profits during ......
-
United States Tr. v. Campayno (In re Campayno)
...482-83, 200 A. 624, 627-28 (1938); Gasner v. Pierce, 286 Pa. at 532; Beihl v. Martin, 236 Pa. 519, 84 A. 953, 954 (1912); McCurdy v. Canning, 64 Pa. 39, 41 (1870). [91] Response, Dkt. No. 38 ¶ 26. [92] Stuckey v. Keefe's Ex'r, 26 Pa. at 399 (emphasis omitted). [93] See Gasner v. Pierce, 286......
-
Estate of Marusich v. State ex rel., Department of Health
...caveat that it only applies during the life of the surviving spouse. In Ward Terry, 297 P.2d at 218–19, this Court quoted McCurdy v. Canning, 64 Pa. 39, 41–42 (Pa.1870) (emphasis added) as follows: [O]ne who, without the consent of the wife, purchases the husband's interest in real estate i......
-
Moore v. Denson
...42 L. R. A. (N. S.) 555, 84 A. 953; 121 A. S. R. (Md.) 578; 102 A. S. R. (Ind) 252; 42 Am. R. (Ind.) 210; 22 A. S. R. 252; 76 Ill. 536; 64 Pa. 39; 30 L. R. A. (Tenn.) 315). S. T. Mayo and Basil Baker, for appellees. It appears that this question has not been directly settled by this court, ......