Miles v. George

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Miles v. George

104 A. 667, 261 Pa. 457, 1918 Pa. LEXIS 766

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJune 3, 1918

DocketAppeal, No. 210

StatusPublished

This text of 104 A. 667 (Miles v. George) 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

Miles v. George, 104 A. 667, 261 Pa. 457, 1918 Pa. LEXIS 766 (Pa. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The claim of the appellee is for boarding, lodging and washing furnished to his mother-in-law, under an alleged express contract that she would pay him for the same. The issue was one of pure fact, and, while the charge of the learned trial judge is fairly open to the criticism that he unduly commented on the probabilities in favor of the plaintiff, it cannot be regarded as reversible on that account, especially as he stated, at the conclusion of his charge, in addressing counsel for the defendant, “Is there anything in my statement of facts or instruction concerning the law that you object to specifically?” To this reply was made, “not at this time.” Then was the time to have called the court’s attention to what is now complained of on this appeal, and the assignments of error complaining of the charge are dismissed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam,

The claim of the appellee is for boarding, lodging and washing furnished to his mother-in-law, under an alleged express contract that she would pay him for the same. The issue was one of pure fact, and, while the charge of the learned trial judge is fairly open to the criticism that he unduly commented on the probabilities in favor of the plaintiff, it cannot be regarded as reversible on that account, especially as he stated, at the conclusion of his charge, in addressing counsel for the defendant, “Is there anything in my statement of facts or instruction concerning the law that you object to specifically?” To this reply was made, “not at this time.” Then was the time to have called the court’s attention to what is now complained of on this appeal, and the assignments of error complaining of the charge are dismissed.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 A. 667, 261 Pa. 457, 1918 Pa. LEXIS 766, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miles-v-george-pa-1918.