Tyson v. Rittenhouse

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania May 16, 1898

Tyson v. Rittenhouse, 186 Pa. 137 (Pa. 1898)

40 A. 476; 1898 Pa. LEXIS 969

Dean, Fell, Green, Sterrett, Williams

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

The question of jurisdiction, presented by this appeal from the decree of the court below sustaining the demurrer and dismissing the bill at plaintiff’s costs, appears to have been carefully considered and correctly decided. We have no doubt as *145to tlie correctness of the conclusion reached by the learned president of the common pleas, and finding nothing in the record that requires special notice the decree is affirmed and appeal dismissed at appellant’s costs.

Reference

Full Case Name: Jacob Tyson, Sole Surviving of the last Will and Testament of Charles Tyson v. Henry Rittenhouse and Josiah R. Bechtel, Executors of the last Will and Testament of Mary Tyson, Frank Evans, Trustees of the Charles Tyson Cemetery, David Rittenhouse, Martin Rittenhouse, Jacob Rittenhouse, William Rittenhouse, Susan Hunsicker, Elizabeth Detweiler, Ann Evans and Rachel Hunsicker
Cited By: 22 cases
Status: Published
Syllabus: Jurisdiction — Gommon pleas — Orphans' court — Decedents' estates — Executors and administrators — Distribution. The court of common pleas has no jurisdiction of a bill in equity filed by the executor of a husband against the executor of a wife, where it appears that both estates are in process of settlement in the orphans’ court, and the matter in controversy is the title of property in process of distribution. In such a case the orphans’ court has exclusive jurisdiction, not only to distribute the property, but also to restrain by injunction any action by either of the litigants, which would cause irreparable damage to the other.