Rohrheimer v. Hofman

103 Pa. 409, 1883 Pa. LEXIS 181
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMay 14, 1883
DocketNo. 273
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 103 Pa. 409 (Rohrheimer v. Hofman) 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
Rohrheimer v. Hofman, 103 Pa. 409, 1883 Pa. LEXIS 181 (Pa. 1883).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was filed

Pise Cukia.u.

Trial by jury was waived, and this case submitted to the court under the Act of Assembly. Within the term of five years absolutely stipulated by the lease, the plaintiff in error, who was the assignee thereof, elected to hold the px-emises for the further term of ten years, as by the terms of the lease he was authorized to do. The main conteutioix ai'ises under the subsequent verbal agreement between the parties relating to the reduction of rent. The court found it to be without considera[412]*412ti'on, and therefore-not binding on the defendant in error. It also found-as.a fact.under conflicting evidence that the reduc* tion in the rent was intended to be temporary, and not to continue until the end of the lease. Without deciding on the correctness of the legal conclusion that the agreement was without consideration, yet if it was understood to be temporary only, that fact sustains the judgment. The finding of fact by the court is entitled to as much weight as the- verdict of a jury. If a jury had arrived at the same conclusion that the court has on the same evidence, the verdict ought not to be disturbed. This finding of fact, appears to be supported by the evidence and controls the case.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Trustees of First Presbyterian Church v. Oliver-Tyrone Corp.
375 A.2d 193 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1977)
New York & Pennsylvania Co. v. New York Central R. R.
110 A. 286 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1920)
Com. v. School District
88 A. 481 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
103 Pa. 409, 1883 Pa. LEXIS 181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rohrheimer-v-hofman-pa-1883.