Legal Opinion

Ferguson v. Barber Asphalt Paving Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 11, 1915No. Appeal, No. 164PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal, No. 164, Oct. T., 1914, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 5, Phila. Co., March T., 1912, No. 3,205, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Daniel Ferguson v. Barber Asphalt Paving Company. Trespass for malicious prosecution. Before Ralston, J. At the trial it appeared that the defendant had caused the arrest of the plaintiff on the charge of the larceny of certain bags of cement.

Read the full summary

Appeal, No. 164, Oct. T., 1914, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 5, Phila. Co., March T., 1912, No. 3,205, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Daniel Ferguson v. Barber Asphalt Paving Company. Trespass for malicious prosecution. Before Ralston, J. At the trial it appeared that the defendant had caused the arrest of the plaintiff on the charge of the larceny of certain bags of cement. He was committed by a magistrate to prison in default of bail, but was subsequently tried and acquitted. At the trial the court refused to permit the plaintiff to testify what a witness against him had…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Trexler, J.,

The first and second assignments are directed against remarks made by plaintiff’s counsel in his address to the jury. As this case goes back for retrial it is not likely the same occasion for complaint in this respect will arise. Plaintiff’s attorney in addressing the jury said that he asked a large sum of money and the guilt and innocence of the plaintiff was to be determined. In' view of the fair and impartial charge of the court we do not think the defendant was harmed by the remarks made. Had a specific sum been mentioned the situation might have been different, but…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ickes v. IckesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
  2. Bernar v. DunlapSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880
  3. Brown v. Central Pennsylvania Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
  4. American Manufacturing Co. To Use of John V. Doniphan v. S. Morgan Smith Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
  5. Waters v. WingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Shields v. Larry Construction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  2. Sims v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  3. Keown v. BuntonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
  4. Almar Building & Loan Ass'n v. Broad Street Trust Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API