
    Bucknor’s Appeal.
    Penalties for taking an appeal for delay, under the Act of May 25, 1874, will not be imposed in a case where an administrator took three appeals in the same case, the first two being from interlocutory decrees, — the administrator having filed an affidavit that the appeals were not taken for delay.
    April 10, 1886, orally.
    March 27, and April 10, 1886.
    Rule for damages under the Act of May 25, 1874, § 1, P. L. 227, in Appeals No. 427, Jan. T., 1884, 139 July T., 1884, and No. 312, Jan. T., 1885, from O. C. Phila. Co., to review the action of the court below respectively, 1, in decreeing that W. H. Bucknor, administrator of A. J. Bucknor, Jr., deceased, should petition for the sale of the decedent’s real estate to pay debts; 2, in ordering the sale and directing a return; and, 3, in dismissing exceptions and confirming the sale. Before Mercur, C. J., Gordon, Trunkey, Clark, and Williams, JJ. Sterrett and Green, JJ., absent, March 27, 1886. Green, J., absent April 10, 1886.
    Of the three above recited appeals taken in this case, the court quashed the first two and affirmed the last : 18 W. N. C. 118 ; 2 Cent. 306; 4 Atl. 738.
    The petition for the above rules alleged that the appeals were taken merely for delay. The rules were argued by counsel March 27, 1886, and continued to April 10, 1886, when the administrator filed an answer denying that the appeals were taken merely for the purpose of delay but averred that they were taken under the advice of counsel, for 'the purpose of litigating and determining material questions.
    
      H. C. Terry, for rule; N. G. Thompson, contra.
   Mercur, C. J.,

We have not always been examiners of what are definitive decrees; but, however that may be, this is not a case which calls for the operation of the Act of 1874.

Rule discharged.

See, also, the next case.  