Opinion
March 15, 1940.
March 18, 1940.
Appeals — Certifying appeal to Supreme Court — Decree of lower court made pursuant to judgment of appellate court — Circumstances.
An appeal to the Superior Court from a decree of the court of common pleas, which raised the question whether the decree appealed from complied with the judgment and order of the Supreme Court in a prior appeal in the same case, pursuant to which the decree of the lower court was entered, was, under the circumstances in the case, certified to the Supreme Court for its determination, in the light of its fuller knowledge of the issues involved in the original case and of its intentions as expressed in its judgment and order.
Appeal, No. 39, March T., 1940, from order of C.P. Dauphin Co., March T., 1939, No. 339 in re first and final account of William H. Neely, substituted trustee under indenture of first mortgage of Union Real Estate Investment Company.
Before KELLER, P.J., CUNNINGHAM, BALDRIGE, STADTFELD, PARKER, RHODES and HIRT, JJ. Appeal certified to Supreme Court.
Petition and rule upon substituted trustee to show cause why balance for distribution should not be awarded as requested.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.
Rule made absolute, opinion by FOX, J. Substituted trustee appealed.
Errors assigned were various findings of the court below and the final decree.
Paul H. Rhoads, with him John Fox Weiss, of Weiss Rhoads and Carl F. Chronister, for appellant.
Mark T. Milnor, for appellee.
Argued March 15, 1940.
This appeal from the decree of the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County raises the question whether the decree appealed from complies with the judgment and order of the Supreme Court in Commonwealth Trust Company Case, 331 Pa. 569, 1 A.2d 662. Appellant contends that he is entitled to recover interest on the bonds of the Union Real Estate Investment Company up to the date of the actual payment of the money following the entry of the order by the lower court made pursuant to the judgment or decree of the Supreme Court, and to an allowance of additional compensation beyond that included in the $35,444.54 stipulated by the parties and referred to in the Supreme Court's opinion. The matter is complicated by the fact that the Commonwealth Trust Company is in liquidation and the preferred rights of its depositors may be affected by a reversal of the lower court's decree.
In view of the admonition of the Supreme Court in Ladner v. Siegel, 296 Pa. 579, 587, 146 A. 710, we are of opinion that the circumstances require us to certify the appeal to the Supreme Court for its determination, in the light of its fuller knowledge of the issues involved in the original case and of its intentions as expressed in its judgment and order. See also, In re Estate of Crawford, 108 Pa. Super. 475, 165 A. 540; Crawford's Est., 313 Pa. 127, 129, 169 A. 438.
Appeal certified to the Supreme Court.