Griffith v. Eshelman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the district court of Lancaster county. This was a qui tam action by John Griffith against Jacob Eshelman for taking usurious interest. On the trial of the cause the defendant cross-examined a witness of the plaintiff on subject^ which were irrelevant to the issue, and then offered evidence to prove that the witness had testified falsely on those subjects; the evidence was received and the plaintiff took a bill of exceptions.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the district court of Lancaster county. This was a qui tam action by John Griffith against Jacob Eshelman for taking usurious interest. On the trial of the cause the defendant cross-examined a witness of the plaintiff on subject^ which were irrelevant to the issue, and then offered evidence to prove that the witness had testified falsely on those subjects; the evidence was received and the plaintiff took a bill of exceptions. On this ground 'the judgment of the court below was reversed; and upon an examination of the plaintiff’s declaration, it appeared that there was no cause of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Kennedy, J.
—This was a qui tarn action in debt, commenced in the district court of Lancaster county, by the plaintiff in error, to recover a penalty for taking usurious interest upon a loan of 500 dollars made by the defendant to Thomas Griffith, the father of the plaintiff, for the space of one year from the 3d day of January 1822, in violation of the act of assembly.
On the trial of the cause, after evidence had been given by the plaintiff showing that the repayment of the money lent by the defendant to Thomas Griffith, for which it was alleged the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Ebersoll v. KrugSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1812
- Shaffer v. KintzerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1809
- Grasser v. EckartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1809
- Miller v. RalstonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1815
- Young v. Commonwealth ex rel. BoalsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1813
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Commonwealth v. PetrilloSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Ray's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Hildeburn v. CurranSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Commonwealth v. GraumanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Erie Railway Co. v. DeckerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1875
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.