Stetson v. Croskey
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Err.or to the District Court of Philadelphia. This was an action on the case by James P. Stetson, Thomas E. Corson and thirteen others against Henry Croskey and Babel H. Irons.
Read the full summary
Err.or to the District Court of Philadelphia. This was an action on the case by James P. Stetson, Thomas E. Corson and thirteen others against Henry Croskey and Babel H. Irons. The action was for deceit in the sale by defendants to plaintiffs, of the schooner Clara, it being alleged in the first count of the declaration that the defendants represented that the vessel was not worm-eaten, when she was so in fact, and that it was known to the defendants, and in the second count — that the defendants, by divers artifices and contrivances, concealed the defect from the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, May 15th 1866, by
Strong, J.
The general rule is, that a plaintiff cannot claim as a right to give as evidence in rebuttal that which he might have given in chief. To this there are doubtless several exceptions not easily susceptible of classification. Most of them, however, are allowed in cases where the defence set up is some new matter, not directly but only inferentially conflicting with the averments of the plaintiff. Such a defence and the evidence to support it may not be anticipated, and hence a plaintiff is allowed to assail it by rebutting…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Browning v. RodmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Schoen v. ElsasserSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- National Surety Corp. v. HeinbokelCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1946
- Rock v. CauffielSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Acklin v. McCalmont Oil Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.