Plumer v. Robertson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. ON a writ of error to the Common Pleas of Westmoreiand county, the record presented the following case. . An action of ejectment was brought in the Court below, by Alexander Plumer, against Andrew Robertson and John W. Sloan, for a house and other property, in Robbstoxun. * í l ^ ' Both the plaintiff and the defendants, claimed under John Hill, who being seised in fee of the premises, executed a mortgage to Robertson, one of the defendants, dated 1st Fe-binary,…
Read the full summary
In Error. ON a writ of error to the Common Pleas of Westmoreiand county, the record presented the following case. . An action of ejectment was brought in the Court below, by Alexander Plumer, against Andrew Robertson and John W. Sloan, for a house and other property, in Robbstoxun. * í l ^ ' Both the plaintiff and the defendants, claimed under John Hill, who being seised in fee of the premises, executed a mortgage to Robertson, one of the defendants, dated 1st Fe-binary, 1808, which was recorded on the 30tb of the following March. This mortgage was for the security of Robertson, against the…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.,
delivered the Court’s opinion.
The record contains the evidence at large, and the charge of the Court to which the counsel for the plaintiff excepted. In considering the charge, I shall state what I take to be the substance of it, without laying too much stress on particular passages. In all cases of this kind, the question is, whether or not the law was declared to the jury in such a manner as might probably mislead them. There were two points on which the cause turned. 1. Had the plaintiff notice of the articles of agreement between Hill and Robertson?—2. Were these articles…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Woods v. FarmereSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1838
- Farmers' & Merchants' National Bank v. WallaceOhio Supreme Court · 1887