Carson v. Bromley
This text of 39 A. 1115 (Carson v. Bromley) 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
There was no evidence against Bromley Brothers’ Carpet: Company, and therefore the learned court below did right in directing the nonsuit as against them. As to the defendant, Thomas Bromley, the trouble with the plaintiff’s case is the-insufficiency of his testimony to convince the jury that the percolations complained of came from the defendant’s stable at all.. The court left to the jury fairly the question whether such percolations did come from the defendant’s stable, and the-jury found they did not. An examination of the testimony convinces us that the verdict was right in this respect. A discussion as to whether the case was one of negligence or nuisance-is altogether unimportant in view of the verdict. There is no-merit in the assignments of error, and they are all dismissed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
39 A. 1115, 184 Pa. 549, 1898 Pa. LEXIS 935, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carson-v-bromley-pa-1898.