From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Silverstein v. Boyle

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Mar 14, 1932
160 A. 221 (Pa. 1932)

Opinion

February 2, 1932.

March 14, 1932.

Appeals — Equity — Chancellor's findings of fact — Partnership.

1. A chancellor's findings of fact, when supported by evidence or reasonable inferences therefrom, and approved by the court in banc, have the effect of a verdict of a jury, and will not be reversed on appeal.

2. A bill in equity, for an accounting between plaintiff and defendant, of real estate alleged to be owned by the parties, is properly dismissed where the chancellor finds as a fact supported by evidence that there was no partnership in the lands alleged, but that they belonged to the defendant individually.

Before FRAZER, C. J., SIMPSON, KEPHART, SCHAFFER, MAXEY and DREW, JJ.

Appeal, No. 87, Jan. T., 1932, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. Lehigh Co., Jan. T., 1929, No. 4, dismissing bill in equity, in case of Joseph Silverstein v. Orrin E. Boyle. Affirmed.

Bill for an accounting. Before SCHAEFFER, P. J., specially presiding.

The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.

Bill dismissed. Plaintiff appealed.

Error assigned, inter alia, was decree, quoting it.

H. B. Friedman, of Aubrey, Friedman Senger, for appellant.

L. H. Rupp, of Butz, Rupp Welty, for appellee.


Argued February 2, 1932.


In his brief, plaintiff states that his bill is primarily and essentially one for an accounting between him and defendant under the allegation that they as partners owned certain real estate. The learned chancellor, who, specially presiding, heard and determined the case, reached the conclusion that there was no partnership so far as ownership of the lands is concerned, that they belonged to defendant individually, that the partnership which existed between plaintiff and defendant was limited to the developing and selling of the lands which defendant owned.

No purpose would usefully be served by a review of the many facts necessary to be taken into account in determining the controversy, as to which the chancellor made sixty-seven separate findings. The case is peculiarly one in which the findings of the trial judge, supported as they are by competent evidence, should be controlling with us. Our examination of the record leads us to the conclusion that he rightly found the facts and we are in accord with any inferences which he may have drawn from them or from circumstances brought to his attention. A chancellor's findings of fact when supported by evidence or reasonable inferences therefrom, when approved by the court in banc, have the effect of a verdict of a jury: Feuerstein v. New Century Realty Co., 304 Pa. 271; Belmont Laboratories, Inc., v. Heist, 300 Pa. 542.

The decree is affirmed at appellant's cost.


Summaries of

Silverstein v. Boyle

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Mar 14, 1932
160 A. 221 (Pa. 1932)
Case details for

Silverstein v. Boyle

Case Details

Full title:Silverstein, Appellant, v. Boyle

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Mar 14, 1932

Citations

160 A. 221 (Pa. 1932)
160 A. 221

Citing Cases

Sheets v. Armstrong

As to the alleged excessiveness of price fixed by the contract at eight dollars per square foot, or a total…

Clabby's Estate

The court below, after considering all the evidence, found the value of the stock for the purposes of…