Potts v. Jones

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Potts v. Jones

21 A. 240, 140 Pa. 48, 1891 Pa. LEXIS 800

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedFebruary 16, 1891

DocketNo. 169

StatusPublished

This text of 21 A. 240 (Potts v. Jones) 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

Potts v. Jones, 21 A. 240, 140 Pa. 48, 1891 Pa. LEXIS 800 (Pa. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Complaint is made that the court below refused to instruct the jury, as requested by the defendant’s fourth point, that “ The plaintiff is not entitled to rescind the trade and reclaim the horse, unless defendant perpetrated a fraud upon him.” The vice of this point is that it assumed the disputed 'facts in the case. The plaintiff’s contention was that there was no trade, and he gave evidence in support of it. This question [51]*51of fact is ignored in the point. The only other assignment is that the court declined to give a binding instruction in favor of the defendant. This the court could not have done, under the evidence. The case was properly submitted to the jury.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam:

Complaint is made that the court below refused to instruct the jury, as requested by the defendant’s fourth point, that “ The plaintiff is not entitled to rescind the trade and reclaim the horse, unless defendant perpetrated a fraud upon him.” The vice of this point is that it assumed the disputed 'facts in the case. The plaintiff’s contention was that there was no trade, and he gave evidence in support of it. This question [51]*51of fact is ignored in the point. The only other assignment is that the court declined to give a binding instruction in favor of the defendant. This the court could not have done, under the evidence. The case was properly submitted to the jury.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 A. 240, 140 Pa. 48, 1891 Pa. LEXIS 800, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/potts-v-jones-pa-1891.