Klenzing v. Allday
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 278, Oct. T., 1915, by plaintiff, from judgment of O. P. Franklin Co., Feb. T., 1914, No. 21, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Mary C. Klenzing v. Alcesta B. Allday. Trespass for the contamination and loss of ice. Before Henry, P. J., specially presiding. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for three cents nominal damages. Errors assigned were various rulings on evidence and instructions.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 278, Oct. T., 1915, by plaintiff, from judgment of O. P. Franklin Co., Feb. T., 1914, No. 21, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Mary C. Klenzing v. Alcesta B. Allday. Trespass for the contamination and loss of ice. Before Henry, P. J., specially presiding. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for three cents nominal damages. Errors assigned were various rulings on evidence and instructions. The jury should have been instructed that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the market value of the ice: Stauffer v. Miller Soap…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Orlady, P. J.,
The controlling facts in this case are not in dispute.
The plaintiff, is the owner of a tract of land, through which flows a small stream, in a natural water course. For the past twenty-five years, she has maintained on this property, an artificial pond and a house with a capacity of 1,600 tons, for harvesting and storage of the ice gathered from the pond, which she, in proper season sold in the vicinity. In the fall of 1912, the pond and ice house were prepared for protecting and gathering the ice crop for the coming winter. In January, 1913, when the ice was beginning…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Stauffer v. Miller Soap Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
- Filbert v. DechertSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1903