Coleman v. Eberly
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin county: Of May Term 1874, No. 71. This was an action of ejectment, brought May 29th 1872, by Charles A. Eberly against Daniel Clapsaddle, William Coleman and Susan R., his wife, in her right, for a piece of land containing 18 acres more or less.
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin county: Of May Term 1874, No. 71. This was an action of ejectment, brought May 29th 1872, by Charles A. Eberly against Daniel Clapsaddle, William Coleman and Susan R., his wife, in her right, for a piece of land containing 18 acres more or less. The land in dispute had belonged to Adam Hoke, deceased, under whom both parties claimed.._ By his will dated May 21st 1867, and proved June 12th 1869, he gave designated pieces of land to several of his children and then gave; “ To the children of my deceased daughter Ann Eberly, as follows, viz.: to…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Sharswood
Parol evidence was unquestionably admissible to show what was the “ extent of the McKinstry farm occupied and farmed by William Brown,” at the date of the will of the testator, Adam Hoke, and that the descriptive addition to the devise, “ containing eight fields,” was a mistake. If this was shown it would fall within the *200rule Falsa demonstrate non nocet. But it is very plain that this was a question for the jury. However clearly the parol evidence might establish the fact that the McKinstry farm occupied and farmed by William Brown at the date of the will contained nine fields — and not…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Logan v. WileySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
- Lewis v. Rickard, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Mercer County1971
- Est. of W.E., Appeal of: Zandieh, A.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2024