# Rieck Ice Cream Co. Appeal

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · February 25, 1965 · 417 Pa. 249

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6258648

## Case

- **Full name:** Rieck Ice Cream Company Appeal
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** February 25, 1965
- **Citations:** 417 Pa. 249; 209 A.2d 383; 1965 Pa. LEXIS 407
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Bell
- **Judges:** Bell, Brien, Cohen, Eagen, Jones, Musmanno, Roberts
- **Cited by:** 36 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6258648

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting, after requiring the trial court to accept the taxpayer’s unrebutted evidence of market value, the absence of any “finding or even suggestion that [the taxpayer’s] witnesses are not credible” (quoting Kemble’s Estate, 280 Pa. at 447, 124 A. at 696)

## Opinion text

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Chief Justice Bell:
I would affirm the Order of the Court below for the reasons set forth at length in my dissenting opinions in Morris v. Bd. of Property Assessment, 417 Pa. 192 , 209 A. 2d 407 , and in Deitch Company v. Bd. of Property Assessment, 417 Pa. 213 , 209 A. 2d 397 .
Mr. Justice Musmanno joins in this Dissenting Opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6258648. Public record. Not legal advice.