Mengell's Executors v. Mohnsville Water Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 320, Jan. T., 1908, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Berks Co., March T., 1906; No. 37, on verdict for plaintiff in case of estate of Matthias Mengel, deceased, v. Mohnsville Water Company. Appeal from report of jury of view.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 320, Jan. T., 1908, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Berks Co., March T., 1906; No. 37, on verdict for plaintiff in case of estate of Matthias Mengel, deceased, v. Mohnsville Water Company. Appeal from report of jury of view. Before Ermentrout, P. J. At the trial the court permitted under objection and exception various witnesses for plaintiff to testify as to value. [1-4] The court charged in part as follows: I want to say further that the jury are not to consider as any evidence of the market value of the property, the price paid for the property in 1875 as the market value…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Mestrezat,
The first four assignments allege error in permitting certain witnesses of the plaintiff to testify. The ground of the objection is that they did not sufficiently qualify themselves to testify in the cause. In his opinion, discharging the rule for a new trial, the learned judge of the court below reviewed the testimony affecting their competency and, as he points out, they were clearly admissible under our decisions.
The fifth assignment alleges error in that part of the charge of the court in which it is said that the jury may allow interest on the damages…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Waugh v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Arkansas-Missouri Power Company v. HamlinMissouri Court of Appeals · 1956
- Chauvin v. Superior Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. City of ReadingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Westmorel'd C. Co. v. Pub. Serv. Com.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.