Skip to main content
· 11/14/1898

Beardslee v. Columbia Township

Citations

  • 188 Pa. 496
  • 41 A. 617
  • 1898 Pa. LEXIS 634

Syllabus

<p>Evidence — Photographs—Preliminary proof of identity and accuracy.</p> <p>Photographs are competent evidence, and when properly taken are judicially recognized as of a high order; but in careless or inexpert or interested hands they are capable of very serious misrepresentation of the original. Before they are permitted to be used in the trial, therefore, there should always be preliminary proof of care and accuracy in the taking of them, and of their relevancy to the issue before the jury.</p> <p>Error in permitting witnesses to refer to a photograph of a locality, without preliminary proof of its identity, will be cured by the production of such proof before such photograph is formally introduced in evidence.</p> <p>On the trial of an action against a township to recover damages for personal injuries caused by an alleged defective road, a photograph of the place of the accident is admissible, although not taken until after changes have been made in the road if proof be made of the nature of the changes in the condition of the road between the time of the accident and the time of photographing.</p> <p>Negligence — Township—Defective road — Hypothetical case — Opinion of nonexpert witness.</p> <p>In an action against a township to recover damages for injuries caused by an alleged defective road upon which plaintiff was driving, it is error to admit an opinion of a nonexpert witness as evidence of contributory negligence, based on a hypothetical case as to the horses, the harness, the wagon and the load, as defendant viewed the evidence in regard to the accident.</p> <p>Practice, common pleas — Exceptions to remarks of court — Act of May 24, 1887.</p> <p>Pai'agraph 3 of the Act of May 24, 1887, P. L. 199, which authorizes exceptions to rulings, orders and remarks of the judge made in the hearing of the jury at any stage of the proceedings, is a provision of very doubtful wisdom, and under it the ordinary rule that the error assigned must appear to have been injuri

Judges: Fell, McCollum, Mitchell, Sterrett, Williams

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.