Hinski v. Stein
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 21, Oct. T., 3917, by defendants, from judgment of Municipal Court'of Philadelphia Co., May T., 1916, No. 288, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Nicholas Hinski v. Rqsie Stein and George Stein, her husband. ’ Trespass for slander. Before Wheeler, J. The statement charged that Rosie Stein on April 28, 1916, spoke the following words to plaintiff’s wife: “Your husband (meaning plaintiff) is a thief, and I can prove it.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 21, Oct. T., 3917, by defendants, from judgment of Municipal Court'of Philadelphia Co., May T., 1916, No. 288, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Nicholas Hinski v. Rqsie Stein and George Stein, her husband. ’ Trespass for slander. Before Wheeler, J. The statement charged that Rosie Stein on April 28, 1916, spoke the following words to plaintiff’s wife: “Your husband (meaning plaintiff) is a thief, and I can prove it. He stole a spigot out of my house, and the pipe down the street he stole from the shop he Avorks at.” It did not appear that George Stein was present when the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
As a sound basis from which to rightly view the question involved, we may safely say it is at least anomalous that one adult human being should be held responsible for the tort of another. The general idea of right and wrong thus indicated is emphasized when the record affirmatively shows that the man punished by the verdict and judgment in the case before us, was not present when the wrong was done and had in no way aided or abetted, counselled or eneouragéd its commission. His liability, if any there be, rests wholly upon the fact he *443was the husband of the woman whose use…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Gustine v. WestenbergerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Smith v. MachesneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913