Jones v. Kroll
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
No. 80 July Term 1886, Sup. Ct.: Court below, No. 303 March T., 1885. This was an Ejectment originally before a magistrate under the landlord and tenant act of 1863, and, on appeal, in the Court of Common Pleas.
Read the full summary
No. 80 July Term 1886, Sup. Ct.: Court below, No. 303 March T., 1885. This was an Ejectment originally before a magistrate under the landlord and tenant act of 1863, and, on appeal, in the Court of Common Pleas. On November 11, 1878, Herman Kroll (as the agent for his wife Maria Kroll,) and Alonzo L. Jones, executed a lease of which the portions that are material in this case are as follows, the parts in Italics being in writing, the other parts printed :— This Agreement witnesseth, That Herman Kroll, of the City of Philadelphia, doth hereby let unto Alonzo L. Jones, of the same place, that…
1Per curiam
Conceding that there was error in leaving to the jury to find the construction which should be given to the written lease, yet inasmuch as they found it what the court should have declared it to be, and what the learned judge in fact stated in discharging the rule for a new trial, the plaintiff in error has no just cause of complaint. He attempted by parol evidence, to induce the jury to give an erroneous construction to the written instrument, but having failed in. this, he must now submit to the verdict and the judgment entered thereon.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Aaron v. WoodcockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- J. W. Reccius & Bro. v. Columbia Finance & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1905
- Local 325 of United Food & Commercial Workers Union v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Korkonikitas v. Allegheny General HospitalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969