New Era Life Ass'n v. Rossiter
19 A. 140, 132 Pa. 314, 1890 Pa. LEXIS 815
Opinion
A careful examination of this case has failed to convince us that the learned judge below committed error, either in his charge, Or in his rulings upon questions of evidence. It was a case for the jury and was fairly submitted. The verdict was in favor of the plaintiff on policy No. 1,643, and in favor of the defendant on policy No. 2,389. We think that substantial justice has been done, and done in an orderly manner.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
New Era Life Ass'n v. Rossiter, 19 A. 140, 132 Pa. 314, 1890 Pa. LEXIS 815 (Pa. 1890).
19 A. 140 (New Era Life Ass'n v. Rossiter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Miller v. Dilkes
95 A. 935 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1915)
Faurot v. Swan
155 Mich. 284 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1908)
Gibson v. Megrew
48 L.R.A. 362 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1900)