Hamory v. Pennsylvania, Monongahela & Southern Railroad

72 A. 227, 222 Pa. 631, 1909 Pa. LEXIS 922
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJanuary 4, 1909
DocketAppeal, No. 41
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 72 A. 227 (Hamory v. Pennsylvania, Monongahela & Southern Railroad) 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.

Bluebook
Hamory v. Pennsylvania, Monongahela & Southern Railroad, 72 A. 227, 222 Pa. 631, 1909 Pa. LEXIS 922 (Pa. 1909).

Opinion

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Elkin,

In a proceeding to assess damages for lands appropriated for railroad purposes under the right of eminent domain, a witness produced by the landowner, was asked on preliminary cross-examination if his estimate of what the property was worth at the time of the entry, was based upon what it would bring if it had been laid out in building lots and all the lots had been sold at what the witness thought they were worth. The witness having answered in the affirmative, objection was made that he was not qualified to express an opinion, because his method of estimating the market value of the whole tract was improper and not in accordance with the rule of law governing such cases. The court admitted the testimony and this ruling is the basis of the only assignment of error. While it is [634]*634proper to take into consideration the use to which the land is best adapted, it is improper to determine the value of the whole tract by computing the number of lots it could be divided into, what each lot was worth, and the value of the whole tract estimated on this basis. This is not a proper method of arriving at the value of the whole tract as has been repeatedly ruled by this court: Penna. Schuylkill Valley Railroad Company v. Cleary, 125 Pa. 442; Gorgas v. Railroad Company, 215 Pa. 501. Nor was this error corrected by the learned trial judge in his charge to the jury. Where evidence has been improperly admitted which tends to prejudice the minds of the jurors, the error is not cured by an instruction in the charge to disregard it or to withdraw it from their consideration: Delaware & Hudson Canal Co. v. Barnes, 31 Pa. 193; Penna. Railroad Co. v. Butler, 57 Pa. 335; Huntingdon, etc., Railroad & Coal Co. v. Decker, 82 Pa. 119; Erie, etc., Railroad Co. v. Smith, 125 Pa. 259.

Assignment of error sustained and a venire facias de novo awarded.

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

Related

Furey v. Thomas Jefferson University Hospital
472 A.2d 1083 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1984)
Blatt v. C. C. Davis Construction Co.
133 A.2d 576 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1957)
Dougherty v. Allegheny County
88 A.2d 73 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1952)
Spiwak v. Allegheny County
77 A.2d 97 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1950)
McJunkin v. Kiner
43 A.2d 608 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1945)
Chatfield v. Board of Revision of Taxes
43 Pa. D. & C. 274 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1941)
Beck v. Wings Field, Inc.
122 F.2d 114 (Third Circuit, 1941)
Lilly v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
177 A. 779 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1935)
Westinghouse Air Brake Co. v. Pittsburgh
176 A. 13 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1934)
Andrien v. Heffernan
149 A. 184 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1930)
Rothenberger Et Ux. v. Reading City
146 A. 104 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1929)
McSorley v. Avalon Borough School District
139 A. 848 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1927)
Sheets v. Upper Nazareth Township Supervisors
7 Pa. D. & C. 121 (Northampton County Court of Common Pleas, 1925)
Kleppner v. Pittsburgh, Bessemer & Lake Erie Railroad
93 A. 765 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1915)
Commonwealth v. Duffy
49 Pa. Super. 344 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1912)
Willock v. Beaver Valley Railroad
79 A. 138 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1911)
Rosenstiel v. Pittsburg Railways Co.
79 A. 556 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1911)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
72 A. 227, 222 Pa. 631, 1909 Pa. LEXIS 922, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamory-v-pennsylvania-monongahela-southern-railroad-pa-1909.