Ream v. Harnish
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Common Pleas of Lancaster county. This was an action of trespass vi et armis, brought by Jacob Harnish and Henry Harnish against Andrew Ream, John Clark, and John Martin Hess, for seizing, cutting, and carrying away a crop of wheat from ground owned by plaintiff’s father. The defendants jointly pleaded not guilty.
Read the full summary
Error to the Common Pleas of Lancaster county. This was an action of trespass vi et armis, brought by Jacob Harnish and Henry Harnish against Andrew Ream, John Clark, and John Martin Hess, for seizing, cutting, and carrying away a crop of wheat from ground owned by plaintiff’s father. The defendants jointly pleaded not guilty. The evidence showed that two judgments were obtained against John Harnish, guardian of Daniel Conrad, before Jacob Fehl, Esq., at the suit of Reuben Benedict, for $2.25, and the other before John Amweg, Esq., at the suit -of Andrew Ream, for $25. That upon both these…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered,
by
THOMPSON, J.
There are not near as many questions raised by the assignments of error in this case as appear to be discussed in the argument of the plaintiff in error. We will content ourselves with a review of the former, leaving the latter for a more appropriate occasion.
1. We discover no error in the treatment by the court of the plaintiff in error. He, jointly with the other defendants, pleaded to issue, and prayed no instructions, on the ground that the evidence did not implicate him. As his execution was satisfied out of the property sold, for…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rinehart v. OlwineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1843
3Cited by4 opinions
- McClarigan v. MatlackSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Baker v. LewisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- King v. BossermanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Schweitzer v. WilliamsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910