Mundis v. Emig
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 441, Jan. T., 1895, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. York Co., Jan. T., 1892, No. 67, on verdict for defendants. Assumpsit for wages.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 441, Jan. T., 1895, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. York Co., Jan. T., 1892, No. 67, on verdict for defendants. Assumpsit for wages. Before Latimer, J. At the trial plaintiff proposed to prove by the witness on the stand that in 1889, in Februar}'-, he was seeking employment as a laborer,—as a workman ; that he saw the advertisement in the York Daily, a newspaper published in the county of York, of a firm that were engaged in the business of digging artesian wells ; advertising under the then firm name of A. G. Emig & Bro.; that he went to find out who these parties were, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Mitchell,
This case has had more prolonged consideration than its importance entitled it to, because at the argument we received the impression that some of the offers of evidence by the plain*424tiff were good in substance, and though they contained irrelevant matters, yet the latter might probably be treated as merely introductory and harmless surplusage, and the plaintiff be allowed to put his case before the jury. Undoubtedly the general rule is that where an offer is made as a whole, of evidence partly admissible and partly not, the judge may reject it all, and is not…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Evans v. EvansSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Wharton v. DouglassSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1874
- Smith v. Arsenal BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1883
3Cited by4 opinions
- Ickes v. IckesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- C. H. Hardy Auto Co. v. PoseySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Mease v. United Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Bausbach v. ReiffSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912