Hoover v. Heim
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the. common pleas of York county. Joseph Heim against John Hoover. This was an action of trespass for an injury done to the person of the plaintiff’s minor daughter, by beating her. The plaintiff, after giving evidence that the consequence of the injury was, that his daughter had ever since been subject to fits, offered to prove that that consequence still continued up to the time of the triai. The defendant objected to the proof of consequences since suit brought.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the. common pleas of York county. Joseph Heim against John Hoover. This was an action of trespass for an injury done to the person of the plaintiff’s minor daughter, by beating her. The plaintiff, after giving evidence that the consequence of the injury was, that his daughter had ever since been subject to fits, offered to prove that that consequence still continued up to the time of the triai. The defendant objected to the proof of consequences since suit brought. The court (Durkee, President) overruled the objection, and sealed a bill of exception. The jury rendered a verdict for…
1Per curiam
Perhaps either trespass or case would be sustained here; but as there was' an exhibition of actual force, the former is the more proper. The evidence that the consequences of the injury continued to be felt since the suit was brought, was evidently proper.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by3 opinions
- Pegram v. StortzWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1888
- Van Dresor v. KingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1859
- Stanish v. Danelevitz, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1950