Irwin v. Wickersham
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of Allegheny county. This was an action of covenant brought to recover ground-rent alleged to be due to plaintiff on a lot in the city of Pittsburgh. On the trial of the cause, defendant’s counsel submitted four points in writing, requesting certain instructions to the jury, all of which the Court answered in the negative, and directed the jury to find for the plaintiff, and reserved the points.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Allegheny county. This was an action of covenant brought to recover ground-rent alleged to be due to plaintiff on a lot in the city of Pittsburgh. On the trial of the cause, defendant’s counsel submitted four points in writing, requesting certain instructions to the jury, all of which the Court answered in the negative, and directed the jury to find for the plaintiff, and reserved the points. Neither the points reserved, nor the facts upon which such points were founded, were stated upon the record. The Court afterwards entered judgment for the defendant non…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Black, J. —
After the evidence in this case had been, gone through with on both sides, the Court directed the jury to find a verdict in favour of the plaintiff, which was done of course. After-wards a judgment was entered for the defendant, non obstante veredicto, upon points said to be reserved. But how reserved? They are not specified. Nobody can tell what they are from anything that appears on the record. Perhaps it was meant to reserve the written propositions submitted by counsel. In the absence of any facts to apply them to, they are mere…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Yerkes v. RichardsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Casey v. Pennsylvania Asphalt Paving Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Koons v. McNameeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- McCallin v. HerzerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886