Mengel v. Connecticut Fire Insurance
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 178, April Term, 1897, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 8, Allegheny County, November T., 1894, No. 486, on verdict for defendant. Attachment sur judgment. Before McCluhg-, J. ■ The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court. Verdict and judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned was in sustaining defendant’s objection to plaintiff’s offer to prove by Wm. B. Swager certain facts which are set out in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Reeder, J.,
The method in which this case was heard and determined in the court below was an unusual one, yet perfectly proper and we see in it nothing to criticize. All the facts were embodied in an offer on the part of the plaintiff and an objection on the part of the defendant, which was agreed upon by both parties to the issue as a fair, exact and correct statement of all the facts in the case. It was, therefore, considered by the court below and will have to be considered here, as in the nature of a case stated.
William B. Swager was the owner of a property insured by the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Roig v. TimSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1883
- Reed v. Penrose'sSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1860
- Dougherty v. HunterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1867
- Palmer v. GilmoreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Riddle v. EttingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1859
3Cited by1 opinion
- American Surety Co. of New York v. DicksonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942