Kauffman v. Swar
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In error from the District Court of Lancaster. May 12. This was an action on a lost bond for $2000, which was proved; the balance due at the time of the loss being $1750; and a receipt under seal for $250, being in full, “ and the last on that bond of all demand,” was shown by the defendant, with evidence of the admissions by the plaintiff of a final settlement.
Read the full summary
In error from the District Court of Lancaster. May 12. This was an action on a lost bond for $2000, which was proved; the balance due at the time of the loss being $1750; and a receipt under seal for $250, being in full, “ and the last on that bond of all demand,” was shown by the defendant, with evidence of the admissions by the plaintiff of a final settlement. The plaintiff alleged there was fraud in procuring the settlement, and the questions were the admissibility of evidence to show that, and the charge of the court to the jury as to the evidence of fraud. The bond in question was for…
1Per curiam
The plaintiff’s case was to be supported by proof of fraudulent practice, involving a great variety of transactions on the intellects of a weak and intemperate man; and to support it, required evidence of his general habits, thoughtlessness, and extravagance in transactions to many of which the defendant was not party. No case of the sort could be made out, if it were necessary to dissect the evidence and show that every part of it was immediately connected with the party to be affected by it. In Beinhard v. Keenbartz, 6 Watts, 93, great latitude was allowed in the admission of evidence on a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Reinhard v. KeenbartzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837
3Cited by1 opinion
- National Council, Knights & Ladies of Security v. OwenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915