O'Keson v. Silverthorn
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Juniata county. This was an action of ejectment by John Silverthorn and others against Samuel O’Keson. After the testimony in.the cause was given, there was no title shown to be in two of the six plaintiffs ; whereupon those two suffered a nonsuit, and the trial went on as to the other four plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the Common Pleas of Juniata county. This was an action of ejectment by John Silverthorn and others against Samuel O’Keson. After the testimony in.the cause was given, there was no title shown to be in two of the six plaintiffs ; whereupon those two suffered a nonsuit, and the trial went on as to the other four plaintiffs. The defendants, therefore, contended that none of the plaintiffs were entitled to recover, but the court instructed the jury that if the four plaintiffs were otherwise entitled to recover, they would not be prejudiced by the nonsuit of the two who had shown no…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Sergeant, J.
The first objection relied upon in this case to the entry of a nonsuit on the trial is removed by the provisions of the Act of Assembly of the 31st March 1823, section 1, which expressly authorizes the course of proceeding pursued on the trial by the plaintiffs.
But the other objection to the verdict as defective for want of sufficient certainty, it is not so easy to get over. In ejectment the verdict must be certain as to the .premises recovered, or at least capable of being rendered certain, by a reference to something of a permanent and…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Smith v. BrotherlineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Harris v. Pittsburg & Lake Erie Railway Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- Seaman v. WaltemireSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Knoblauch v. Bankes, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Schuylkill County1927