Hornketh v. Barr
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. THIS was an action of trespass on the case, brought in the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia, by ' “ # Hugh Barr, the defendant in error, against the plaintiff in errori George Hornketh, for debauching his minor daughter, per quod servitium amisit.
Read the full summary
In Error. THIS was an action of trespass on the case, brought in the District Court for the city and county of Philadelphia, by ' “ # Hugh Barr, the defendant in error, against the plaintiff in errori George Hornketh, for debauching his minor daughter, per quod servitium amisit. On the trial, it was proved, that the plaintiff below resided m Northampton county, and that his daughter, about eleven s'ncei came, with his consent, to Philadelphia, to reside W*t^1 a marrle<^ sister, with whom she remained until the year 1815, when she returned to her father, and continued vvit^ him a year. She…
1Opinion of the Court
*39The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Duncan J.
In this action, the loss of service is the legal foundation of the plaintiff’s right; and though it is difficult to reconcile to principle the giving damages ultra the mere loss of service, — -damages for the injured feelings of the parent, for family honour and distress, — damages for loss of comfort ; and though the pecuniary loss is generally the smallest, where the damages recovered are the greatest, and where the real loss of service is lost sight of in the higher injury done to the child, yet the loss of service is still the foundation…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Bartley v. . RichtmyerNew York Court of Appeals · 1850
- South v. DennistonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
- Hartman v. McCraryMissouri Court of Appeals · 1894
- Boyd v. ByrdIndiana Supreme Court · 1846
- Wilson v. SproulSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1831