Bishop v. Goodhart
This text of 19 A. 1026 (Bishop v. Goodhart) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
W e are not convinced that there is any error in this record that would justify a reversal of the judgment. The offers of evidence recited in the first and second specifications were rightly rejected. There was no error in refusing to affirm defendants’ points as presented, nor in refusing to answer either of them more specifically than was done in the general charge. Neither of them could have been affirmed without qualification, and hence it would not have been error to have refused them both. The general charge, including the portions recited in the fifth and sixth specifications, was quite as favorable to the defendants as they had any just reason to expect. The evidence on which they relied was not sufficient to have justified the jury in finding that they were entitled to any other credit on the judgment than the $92.20 that was admitted to be correct. Neither of the assignments of error is sustained.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
19 A. 1026, 135 Pa. 374, 1890 Pa. LEXIS 1189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bishop-v-goodhart-pa-1890.