Reitze v. Meadville & L. Ry. Co.
This text of 17 A. 663 (Reitze v. Meadville & L. Ry. Co.) 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.
Opinion
This action was commenced before a justice of the peace. It was brought to recover damages against the defendant company for killing a horse. Upon appeal to the Common Pleas it expanded into a breach of contract for not maintaining a fence along the right of way or road of the company. While it is true that, upon an appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace, the case is tried de novo, it is also true the cause of action must remain the same. This has been the law since Moore v. Wait, 1 Binn. 219. The judgment of nonsuit was properly entered.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
17 A. 663, 126 Pa. 437, 1889 Pa. LEXIS 895, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reitze-v-meadville-l-ry-co-pa-1889.