Opinion
October 1, 1934.
November 26, 1934.
Appeals — Review — Decree in proceeding for accounting and for reconveyance of property — Decree warranted by evidence.
A decree entered by the chancellor and concurred in by the court in banc, dismissing a bill in equity for an accounting under the terms of an agreement by plaintiff and defendants in which the latter agreed to supervise and arrange for the payment of plaintiff's debts from royalties accruing under a coal lease owned by plaintiff, and for a reconveyance of property acquired by defendants by virtue of sheriff's sales, was on appeal held by the appellate court to be free from error and fully warranted by the evidence.
Argued October 1, 1934.
Before FRAZER, C. J., SIMPSON, KEPHART, SCHAFFER, MAXEY, DREW and LINN, JJ.
Appeal, No. 167, March T., 1934, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. Cambria Co., Dec. T., 1932, No. 2, in equity, in case of Christ E. Blough v. Frank P. Barnhart et al. Decree affirmed.
Bill in equity. Before GREER, J.
The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.
Decree entered dismissing bill. Plaintiff appealed.
Error assigned, inter alia, was decree, quoting record.
D. P. Weimer, of Weimer Bennett, for appellant.
A. Lloyd Adams and Philip N. Shettig, for appellees.
Plaintiff's bill sought an accounting under the terms of an agreement executed by plaintiff and defendants in which the latter agreed, among other things, to supervise and arrange for the payment of plaintiff's debts from royalties accruing under a coal lease owned by plaintiff. The bill also prayed for the reconveyance of property acquired by defendants by virtue of sheriff's sales therein referred to. After hearing the parties and their witnesses, the chancellor held that plaintiff was not entitled to a reconveyance of the property in question, that the cessation of payments of royalty by plaintiff constituted a breach of the agreement between the parties, and that defendants had made a correct accounting in their answer. He accordingly dismissed the bill. Exceptions to the findings of fact and conclusions of law were later overruled by the court in banc and the decree affirmed. Upon a thorough examination of the voluminous record, we are clearly of opinion the conclusion reached by the learned chancellor, and concurred in by the court in banc, is free from error and fully warranted by the evidence.
The decree of the lower court is affirmed at appellant's costs.