Schwab v. Ginkinger
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 97, Jan. T., 1897, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Northampton Co., April T., 1893, No. 18-, on verdict for plaintiff. Assumpsit to recover a balance of money in the hands of the defendant alleged to belong to the estate of Samuel Ginkinger, deceased. Before Schuyler, P. J. At the trial plaintiff claimed that the defendant who was the son of Samuel Ginldnger, deceased, had collected $1,760.73 pension money for his father, and had retained it for his own use.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 97, Jan. T., 1897, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Northampton Co., April T., 1893, No. 18-, on verdict for plaintiff. Assumpsit to recover a balance of money in the hands of the defendant alleged to belong to the estate of Samuel Ginkinger, deceased. Before Schuyler, P. J. At the trial plaintiff claimed that the defendant who was the son of Samuel Ginldnger, deceased, had collected $1,760.73 pension money for his father, and had retained it for his own use. The following papers were offered in evidence : “ To all persons whom these presents shall come, Greeting. “ Whereas,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Gbeen,
This is an action to recover money alleged to be in the hands of the defendant, but belonging to the plaintiff’s intestate at the time of his death. It is not an action upon a written instrument of any kind. The testimony to show that the defendant had money in his hands belonging to the plaintiff’s intestate was entirely and exclusively in parol. ■ In order to understand the case at all it was absolutely necessary to hear that testimony, and to have it heard and considered by the jury. When the learned court below excluded the testimony of Men-line and struck out…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Dougherty v. BriggsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Selig v. RehfussSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Clark & Son v. Ley, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Crawford County1921