Borda v. Phila. & R. R.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Borda v. Phila. & R. R., 141 Pa. 484 (Pa. 1891)
21 A. 665; 1891 Pa. LEXIS 1090
Clark, Cueiam, Green, Paxson, Sterrett, Williams

Borda v. Phila. & R. R.

Opinion of the Court

Pee Cueiam:

This action was commenced in the court below in the year 1874, and was referred to the late Peter McCall, Esq., under the act of June 16, 1836. After a thorough and exhaustive discussion of the case, both upon its law and its facts, he made an award in favor of the defendant. A large number of exceptions were taken below to his award, which were overruled by the court. Sixty-seven assignments of error were filed in .this' court, nearly all of which are to the learned referee’s findings *498of fact. It is sufficient to say, in reference to tire latter, that we have not the testimony before us, and for this reason cannot review them, even were it proper to do so under the act of 1836. Conceding the facts as found by the referee, we cannot say his conclusions are wrong, and we affirm the judgment upon his report.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
EUGENE BORDA v. PHILA. & R. R. CO.
Cited By
6 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Where judgment was entered upon the award of a referee, in a submission under § 6, act of June 16, 1836, P. L. 718, ( — in this case, an action ex delicto against a railroad company for unlawful discriminations,) the specifications of error, relating chiefly to the referee’s findings of fact, being approved by the court, and the testimony not being fully presented, the findings cannot be reviewed, even if it were proper under the act.