Kachline v. Clark
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. This was a writ of error to the Court of Common Pleas of the County of Bucks, to remove the record of the proceedings on an issue directed to that Court, to try the validity of a paper writing, dated the 23d of October, 1837, purporting to be the last will and testament of Joseph Clark, late of Doylestown township in the said county; in which issue Samuel Kachline and John B. Pugh were plaintiffs, and James Clark was defendant.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. This was a writ of error to the Court of Common Pleas of the County of Bucks, to remove the record of the proceedings on an issue directed to that Court, to try the validity of a paper writing, dated the 23d of October, 1837, purporting to be the last will and testament of Joseph Clark, late of Doylestown township in the said county; in which issue Samuel Kachline and John B. Pugh were plaintiffs, and James Clark was defendant. On the trial, before Fox, President, on the 16th of February, 1839, the plaintiffs proved the execution of the paper as a will, and read the same in…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Kennedy, J. —
We are unable to perceive the relevancy of the evidence set forth in the first bill of exception. The specific object of offering or admitting it, is not stated; but still unless it appear to be in some way material to the issue joined, it ought not to have been received, after having been objected to by the counsel for the plaintiffs; and more especially ought this rule to prevail and be adhered, to, when there is reason to believe, that such evidence may either tend to confuse or mislead the jury. The issue here was devisavit vel non: in…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Clark v. FisherNew York Court of Chancery · 1828
- Wooddy v. TaylorSupreme Court of Virginia · 1913
- American Baseball Club v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933