« 이전계속 »
LANCASTER LAW REVIEW,
THE DECISIONS OF THE SEVERAL COURTS OF LANCASTER COUNTY
LEGAL MISCELLANY, ETC.
LOWER COURT DECISIONS REPORTED IN THIS VOLUME WHICH HAVE SINCE BEEN APPEALED TO A HIGHER COURT
AND THE APPEALS NOT YET REPORTED.
King vs. Lanc. Co. Mut. Fire Ins. Co.
77 08 108 113 185 201 203 211 217 236 308 314
After the ist word of the 25th line of the 2nd column on page 5 the word "was " should be inserted, making that part of the sentence read “who was paid."
On page 62, ist column, 18th line, after the word " were” the following words are omitted, viz., a part was.
In the report of Sensenig vs. P. R. R. Co. on page 305, the name of the court below should be HASSLER, J., instead of “Landis, P. J."
American Union Telephone Co., Smithgall Bullock, Commonwealth vs..
34 Byers, Jacob J., deceased, Estate of...... 301
Aston, Benj., Commonwealth vs..
140 Chubbs and Wife, Assigned Estate of.... 365
ter County vs..
Clark, Appellant, vs. City of Lancaster. 385
Baker, A. M., Harry G. Wise vs..
13 Cohn, E. and Rebecca, trading as N. Y.
407 Columbia and Port Deposit Ry. Co.,
Barnes, Brinton, trustee t's..
Binkley vs. Nolt..
Bowman et al., Supervisors of East Lam- Commonwealth y's. Fowl....
Brown, Geo.'s Sons, Harry Smith, Appel- Commonwealth vs. Noah Keesey.
Brown, Geo.'s Sons, Paul E. Smith vs. Commonwealth i's. Mantia..
Brown, Geo.'s Sons, Paul E. Smith, Appel- Commonwealth i's. Newcomer
6' Commonwealth vs. Williams.