Sensenig v. Parry
This text of 5 A. 11 (Sensenig v. Parry) 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
The opinion of the Court was filed
There was no error in disallowing the evidence of counsel fee paid by the plaintiff. It is not such legal damage as is specified in the condition of the injunction bond, as to permit a recovery therefor: Good v. Mylin, 8 Pa. St., 51; Stopp v. Smith, 71 Id., 285. All other alleged damages “ sustained by reason of such injunction ” was a question of fact, and the evidence relating thereto was submitted to the jury in a clear and correct charge. There was no error in the admission of evidence tending to disprove damages.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
5 A. 11, 113 Pa. 115, 1886 Pa. LEXIS 341, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sensenig-v-parry-pa-1886.