Shaw v. Wile
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
This case came before the court on a writ of error to the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia. In the court below if was an action brought by Conrad Wile, the defendant in error, against the plaintiff in error, Joseph Shaw, for debauching the plaintiff’s daughter, and getting her with child, per quod servitium ■amisit. / The suit was instituted on the 8th of May, 1823, and the declaration, which was filed on the 11th of August, 1823, set forth, that the…
Read the full summary
This case came before the court on a writ of error to the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia. In the court below if was an action brought by Conrad Wile, the defendant in error, against the plaintiff in error, Joseph Shaw, for debauching the plaintiff’s daughter, and getting her with child, per quod servitium ■amisit. / The suit was instituted on the 8th of May, 1823, and the declaration, which was filed on the 11th of August, 1823, set forth, that the defendant “heretofore, to wit: on the 6th day of August, A. D. Í822, and on divers other days and times, between that day…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Huston, J.
It was contended here, that from the narr. in this case, it was apparent, that the jury gave damages for a period of time subsequent to the commencement of the action; or, that from what is contained in the narr. and pleas, they may have done so, and that this is error, for which this court must reverse.
I admit, that generally, in stating the damages, care must be taken that no part of them appear to have accrued after the commencement of the action; and that if it is laid affirmatively, that they did accrue after the commencement of the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Succession of BlancoLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1907
- Succession of MarkeySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1870