Hurley v. Jones

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Hurley v. Jones

30 A. 499, 165 Pa. 34, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 923

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedNovember 12, 1894

DocketAppeal, No. 242

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 30 A. 499 (Hurley v. Jones) 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

Hurley v. Jones, 30 A. 499, 165 Pa. 34, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 923 (Pa. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Cukiam,

The defendant’s point was properly refused by the learned court below. This was not a condemnation proceeding, but an ordinary action of trespass for injury to the plaintiff’s close. The plaintiff was entitled to recover any actual damages he suffered by reason of the trespass of the defendant, and he complained of the destruction of his vegetables and his fences. Any advantage to the lot by reason of the fill is not a proper subject of consideration.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Pee Cukiam,

The defendant’s point was properly refused by the learned court below. This was not a condemnation proceeding, but an ordinary action of trespass for injury to the plaintiff’s close. The plaintiff was entitled to recover any actual damages he suffered by reason of the trespass of the defendant, and he complained of the destruction of his vegetables and his fences. Any advantage to the lot by reason of the fill is not a proper subject of consideration.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A. 499, 165 Pa. 34, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 923, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hurley-v-jones-pa-1894.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack