Ulmer v. Gentner
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Error to tlie Court of Common Pleas, No. 3, of Philadelphia County. Feigned issue, between Frederick Gentner, plaintiff, and John George Ulmer, executor of the last will and testament of L. I). Bek, deceased, defendant, awarded by the Orphans’ Court of Philadelphia county, to determine the genuineness of the signature to, and the existence of, a valid and sufficient consideration for a certain obligation or due bill.
Read the full summary
Error to tlie Court of Common Pleas, No. 3, of Philadelphia County. Feigned issue, between Frederick Gentner, plaintiff, and John George Ulmer, executor of the last will and testament of L. I). Bek, deceased, defendant, awarded by the Orphans’ Court of Philadelphia county, to determine the genuineness of the signature to, and the existence of, a valid and sufficient consideration for a certain obligation or due bill. The due bill was written in German, and the following is the translation: “I, the undersigned, L. I). Bek, acknowledge, by these presents, that I am indebted to Frederick…
1Opinion of the Court
— Per Curiam :
Under a clear and correct charge the jury found the signature was not a forgery, and that the note was given upon a valid and sufficient consideration. The evidence was amply sufficient to justify the verdict.
We discover no error in the rejection of evidence. Some offered was clearly irrelevant. A magnified drawing of the outer lines of the signature is only the copy of a part thereof, and was clearly inadmissible for the purpose offered. It is not like a photograph of the whole signature. Comparison may be made by the jury between the disputed signature and those of the party…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State ex rel. Crooks v. CumminsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1930
- Berkley v. MaurerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909