Oakland Railway Co. v. Fielding

48 Pa. 320, 1864 Pa. LEXIS 186
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 27, 1864
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 48 Pa. 320 (Oakland Railway Co. v. Fielding) 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
Oakland Railway Co. v. Fielding, 48 Pa. 320, 1864 Pa. LEXIS 186 (Pa. 1864).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered, by

Woodward, C. J.

— We have looked attentively through the [328]*328answers of the court to the several propositions submitted, and we detect no error whatever in any of them. Indeed, it seems to us that the charge presented the case to the jury with great clearness and precision.

The first error assigned was not pressed, and in view of the proofs it was well abandoned.

The second error assigns the language of the plaintiff’s seventh point rather than that of the court. The concluding sentences of the charge furnished the rule of damages in terms less exceptionable than those of the seventh point, and of them, there is neither complaint nor reason for complaint.

It is impossible for us to assign the reasons for.overruling the second, fifth, ninth, and tenth points of the defendants, more satisfactorily than the learned judge has done, and after all that has been urged against his rulings, it is impossible to doubt their soundness. We will not renew the discussion, but refer ourselves to the reasons already upon the record.

If the jury exceeded, somewhat, the bounds of a sound discretion in assessing the damages, they erred through no fault of the court, and they are not within reach of our corrective power.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Shaffer-Doan Ex Rel. Doan v. COM., DPW
960 A.2d 500 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2008)
Forte v. Connerwood Healthcare, Inc.
745 N.E.2d 796 (Indiana Supreme Court, 2001)
DeSantis v. Yaw
434 A.2d 1273 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1981)
DiBlasi v. Pennsylvania Railroad
66 Pa. D. & C. 234 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1948)
In Re Charles Mikasinovich
168 A. 506 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1933)
Thompson v. Town of Fort Branch
178 N.E. 440 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1931)
Adams v. Brosius
139 P. 729 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1914)
Bice v. Wheeling Electrical Co.
59 S.E. 626 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1907)
Hunt v. Graham
15 Pa. Super. 42 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1900)
Gates v. Pennsylvania R.
24 A. 638 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1892)
Kehler v. Schwenk
22 A. 910 (Northumberland County Court of Common Pleas, 1891)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
48 Pa. 320, 1864 Pa. LEXIS 186, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oakland-railway-co-v-fielding-pa-1864.