Cook v. Nicholas

2 Watts & Serg. 27
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided July 15, 1841·Published·Cited by 13 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

There is no substance in the assignment of errors, and we notice the case particularly, only because it presents an opportunity to supply what was omitted in Dawson v. M’Gill, (4 Whart. 230) by stating, as the subject has been mentioned during the argument, that a plaintiff in ejectment shall not [29] be allowed to give evidence of mesne profits, unless he shall give notice of it in time for preparation to encounter it. No notice was given here, and the matter passed without objection; hereafter the practice will be different.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cook v. Nicholas, 2 Watts & Serg. 27 (Pa. 1841).

2 Watts & Serg. 27 (Cook v. Nicholas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Richards v. Christman
40 Pa. D. & C.2d 196 (Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, 1966)
Weaver v. Reinhart
11 Pa. D. & C. 120 (Schuylkill County Court of Common Pleas, 1928)
Alexander v. Shalala
77 A. 554 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1910)
Beam v. Gardner
18 Pa. Super. 245 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1901)
Lumley v. Haggerty
68 N.W. 243 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1896)
Neilson v. Grignon
55 N.W. 890 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1893)
Carman v. Beam
88 Pa. 319 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1879)
Dyer v. Brannock
2 Mo. App. 432 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1876)
Cadwalader v. App
81 Pa. 194 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1876)
Grubb v. Grubb
74 Pa. 25 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1873)
Bannon v. Brandon
34 Pa. 263 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1859)
Martin v. Jackson
27 Pa. 504 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1856)
Commonwealth v. Chambre
4 U.S. 124 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1794)