Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
ButlervsPowersBrief May 15

ButlervsPowersBrief May 15

Ratings: (0)|Views: 26|Likes:
Published by lauraeolson

More info:

Published by: lauraeolson on May 15, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/15/2012

pdf

text

original

 
INTHESUPREMECOURTOFPENNSYLVANIAMIDDLEDISTRICTNo.27MAP2012JOHNE.ANDMARYJOSEPHINEBUTLER,Appellants,
v.
CHARLESPOWERSESTATE,BYCHARLESA.WARREN,ADMINISTRATOROFTHEESTATEOFCHARLESPOWERS,ANDCHARLESPOWERS,INDIVIDUALLY,HISHEIRS(WILLIAMPRITCHARDANDCRAIGL.PRITCHARD)ANDASSIGNSGENERALLY,EXECUTORS,ADMINISTRATORS,LEGATEES,GRANTEESANDALLOTHERPERSONSCLAIMINGBYORTHROUGHTHESAIDPARTIESANDALLOTHERPERSONSINTERESTEDINSAIDPROPERTY,Appellees.
BRIEFFORAPPELLANTS
AppealfromtheOrderofSeptember7,2011oftheSuperiorCourtatNo.1795MDA2010,whichreversedtheOrderofCourtenteredonJanuary27,2010atNo.2009-1141intheCourtofCommonPleasofSusquehannaCounty,PennsylvaniaGregoryJ.KrockPa.J.D.No.78308ThomasF.MeagherIIIPa.J.D.No.205461
BUCHANANINGERSOLL
&
ROONEYPC
OneOxfordCentre301GrantStreet,20thFloorPittsburgh,PA15219-1410(412)562-3983
LAWOFFICEOFMICHAEL
J.
GIANGRIECO
60PublicAvenueP.O.Box126Montrose,PA18801(570)278-4026CounselforAppellants
JohnE.andMaryJosephineButler
 
TABLEOFCONTENTSPAGE
TABLEOFAUTHORITIES
111
STATEMENTOFJURISDICTION................................................................................1ORDERINQUESTION1STATEMENTOFSCOPEANDSTANDARDOFREVIEW2STATEMENTOFQUESTIONINVOLVED.................................................................3STATEMENTOFTHECASE........................................................................................4A.TheMotionforDeclaratoryRelief................................................................4B.TheTrialCourtRulingontheButlers'PreliminaryObjections5C.TheSuperiorCourtProceedingsandOpinion...............................................6SUMMARYOFARGUMENT8ARGUMENT10A.The
Dunham
RulePresumesThatOrdinaryPeopleIntendtheTerm"Mineral"toIncludeOnlyMetallicSubstances.............................10B.The
Dunham
PresumptionCanOnlyBeRebuttedbytheIntentoftheParticularPartiesWhoNegotiatedtheDeed.............................14C.TheTrialCourtPropertyConcludedthatthePritchardsFailedtoAllegeFactsWhich(ifTrue)WouldRebutthe
Dunham
Presumption...................................................................................................17D.TheSuperiorCourtFailedtoProperlyApplythe
Dunham
RuleandRemandedtheCaseforEvidenceThatCannotRebutthePresumption.............................................................................................181.TheSuperiorCourtFailedtoRecognizeThat
Dunham
PresumesthatthePartiesDidNotIntend"Minerals"toIncludeMarcellusShale19
1
 
3.TheSuperiorCourtErroneouslyApplied
Hoge,
WhichDidNotInvolvetheTerm"Mineral"orthe
Dunham
Rule,toLimitthe
Dunham
Presumption...........................................232.TheSuperiorCourtErroneouslyImpliedthatthe
Dunham
RuleOnlyAppliesto"Conventional"NaturalGas........................................................................................21CONCLUSION27
11

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->