Gallagher v. Whitney

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Gallagher v. Whitney

23 A. 560, 147 Pa. 184, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 808

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided January 25, 1892·No. Appeal, No. 444·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The only serious complaint here is that the learned judge below erred in his charge to the jury upon the measure of damages. The ingenious argument of the counsel for the appellant has failed to satisfy us that the court committed error. An examination of that portion of the charge contained in the second specification, shows that the learned judge was correct in his calculation, while the rule laid down for the measure of damages, contained in the first specification, is entirely accurate.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam,

The only serious complaint here is that the learned judge below erred in his charge to the jury upon the measure of damages. The ingenious argument of the counsel for the appellant has failed to satisfy us that the court committed error. An examination of that portion of the charge contained in the second specification, shows that the learned judge was correct in his calculation, while the rule laid down for the measure of damages, contained in the first specification, is entirely accurate.

Judgment affirmed.

Gallagher v. Whitney, 23 A. 560, 147 Pa. 184, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 808 (Pa. 1892).

Pincite

23 A. 560 (Gallagher v. Whitney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related