Kulp v. Bird

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Kulp v. Bird

8 A. 618, 5 Sadler 541, 1887 Pa. LEXIS 576

DecidedMarch 14, 1887

StatusPublished

This text of 8 A. 618 (Kulp v. Bird) 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

Kulp v. Bird, 8 A. 618, 5 Sadler 541, 1887 Pa. LEXIS 576 (Pa. 1887).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam :

We have given to this case a thorough examination, and have ■carefully considered all the specifications of error; yet we are not able to find any error in the record. We do not discover that the learned judge, in his able arid clear charge, stated either the law or the facts incorrectly. The rulings relating to the admission of evidence are free from error. The record shows affirmatively that the jury gave single damages only for the oak; this gave a clear right to the court to double those damages. Clark v. Sargeant, 112 Pa. 16, 5 Atl. 44.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam :

We have given to this case a thorough examination, and have ■carefully considered all the specifications of error; yet we are not able to find any error in the record. We do not discover that the learned judge, in his able arid clear charge, stated either the law or the facts incorrectly. The rulings relating to the admission of evidence are free from error. The record shows affirmatively that the jury gave single damages only for the oak; this gave a clear right to the court to double those damages. Clark v. Sargeant, 112 Pa. 16, 5 Atl. 44.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A. 618, 5 Sadler 541, 1887 Pa. LEXIS 576, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kulp-v-bird-pa-1887.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack