Romans v. Robertson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
COVENANT on a written agreement, to stand to the award of Aaron Williams, James Magrew and James Montgomery, who were chosen to settle a difference between the parties, respecting the price of a mill bought by the plaintiff from the defendant, and the improvements made thereon by the plaintiff, the parties allowing the bargain to be avoided, dated 20th February 1800. The arbitrators awarded on the same day, that the plaintiff should give up possession of the mill to the…
Read the full summary
COVENANT on a written agreement, to stand to the award of Aaron Williams, James Magrew and James Montgomery, who were chosen to settle a difference between the parties, respecting the price of a mill bought by the plaintiff from the defendant, and the improvements made thereon by the plaintiff, the parties allowing the bargain to be avoided, dated 20th February 1800. The arbitrators awarded on the same day, that the plaintiff should give up possession of the mill to the defendant, against the first day of April then next; that the defendant should give up his bonds to the plaintiff, and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
The defendant’s witnesses have failed him. Surely there is no satisfactory proof of some plain mistake exhibited to the jury ! It would be highly dangerous to go further into this kind of testimony! Williams and Magrew having heard the statement of the defendant alone, and having been improperly prevailed upon to express dissatisfaction with the award they had made, are now called upon to justify what they have done. But even Magrew is dissatisfied with himself.
Unless a clear mistake in the award is pointed out and ascertained, we will not re-examine the transactions of judges of…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Taylor v. CoryellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1825