Semple v. Callery
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 112, Oct. T., 1897, by-James D. Callery et al., from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., on verdict for plaintiff. Assumpsit to recover the value of ten bonds.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 112, Oct. T., 1897, by-James D. Callery et al., from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., on verdict for plaintiff. Assumpsit to recover the value of ten bonds. Before Kennedy, P. J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court, and by the charge of the court below which was as follows: This action is brought by the executrix of William Semple, deceased, against the executors of James Callery, deceased, for the recovery of the value of ten bonds of.the Pittsburg, Painesville & Fairport Railroad Company, which the plaintiff alleges William Semple purchased from James…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Fell,
The court, at the time a witness was called, heard testimony on the question of the good faith of an assignment by which the witness had divested himself of all interest in the controversy, and permitted him to testify. At the close of the testimony the court was requested to submit to the jury the same question on which it liad passed, and to instruct them to disregard the testimony of the witness if they found that the assignment had not been made in good faith. The 6th section of the Act of May 23, 1887, P. L. 158, provides that a person incompetent to testify as…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Dinger v. FriedmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Crosetti's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Acupuncture Center of Washington v. DunlopCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1976
- MacHnofsky v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Morgan v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.