Wenger v. Barnhart
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster county. This was an action of trover, brought November 22d 1867, by E. S. Barnhart and James Koch, trading as Barnhart & Koch, against Joel Wenger and Samuel Wolf, Jr., for the value of 65 barrels of flour.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster county. This was an action of trover, brought November 22d 1867, by E. S. Barnhart and James Koch, trading as Barnhart & Koch, against Joel Wenger and Samuel Wolf, Jr., for the value of 65 barrels of flour. Isaac Brown, a witness for plaintiffs, testified that the plaintiffs, who lived in Reading, and with whom he had been in the habit of dealing in flour, said they must have 100 barrels of flour; that he replied he could not tell where he could get that much ; that he had 25 barrels of Burkholder’s brand, and that he would get as much as he…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered, July 3d 1867, by
Agnew, J.
— We think that the effect of the charge was to mislead the jury on the vital point of the case. Taken singly, perhaps no part of the charge can be said to be clearly erroneous. The judge very correctly stated that it was a question of delivery by Wenger at New Berlin, and that after delivery there, he had no right of stoppage in transitu. But the real question before the jury was, what constituted a delivery and whether it was complete ? Upon this point the charge, as a whole, must have led the jury to believe that the verbal…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Clemson v. DavidsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1812
3Cited by2 opinions
- Utility Constructors, Inc. v. Zoning Hearing Board, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Crawford County1982
- Storey v. HersheySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1902