Orr v. Seiler

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Orr v. Seiler

1 Pennyp. 445

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedNovember 14, 1881

DocketNo. 102

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 1 Pennyp. 445 (Orr v. Seiler) 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

Orr v. Seiler, 1 Pennyp. 445 (Pa. 1881).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

We find no error in the answers of the learned Court to the points presented. There was nothing in the information given to Gerdes, and communicated by him to Orr, which made probable cause for the latter to institute a prosecution for larceny. As it appears that the proceeding was a wanton and a reckless one, and especially if the design was to get back property alleged to have been wrongfully taken, which, if it was true, could only be remedied by a civil action, there was no error in the instruction to the jury on the subject of damages.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam:

We find no error in the answers of the learned Court to the points presented. There was nothing in the information given to Gerdes, and communicated by him to Orr, which made probable cause for the latter to institute a prosecution for larceny. As it appears that the proceeding was a wanton and a reckless one, and especially if the design was to get back property alleged to have been wrongfully taken, which, if it was true, could only be remedied by a civil action, there was no error in the instruction to the jury on the subject of damages.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Pennyp. 445, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/orr-v-seiler-pa-1881.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack