Broadnax v. Cheraw & Salisbury R. R.

Citations

• 157 Pa. 140
• 27 A. 412
• 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1408

Syllabus

<p>. Ships and shipping — General average.</p> <p>A cargo cannot be subjected to general average for losses occasioned by the unseaworthy condition of the vessel, where such condition existed at the beginning of the voyage.-</p> <p>Presumption of unseaworthiness — Evidence—Burden of proof.</p> <p>Where it is shown that, shortly after the commencement of a voyage, a vessel, without encountering any stress of weather or any unusual perils of the sea, became so leaky as to be obliged to put into a port of refuge for repairs, the presumption is that she was unseaworthy when she sailed.</p> <p>Evidence — Seaworthiness—Glassification.</p> <p>In an action on a general average bond where the question at issue was the seaworthiness of the vessel at the beginning of the voyage, it is not improper to ask a witness whether the vessel had a classification of seven years, at the time she was built and classed “A No. 1.” The question might be answered so as to throw some light upon the history of the vessel and her condition when she sailed. In such a case it is also proper to admit in evidence the certificate of classification.</p> <p>Failure to object to testimony — Beview—Practice.</p> <p>Where the answer of a witness is not responsive to a question and no exception is taken to the answer, and the court is not requested to strike it off, it cannot be objected to after judgment and appeal to the Supreme Court.</p> <p>A ssignment of error — Evidence—Practice.</p> <p>An assignment of error which does not sot forth the evidence admitted under an objection to a question, is improper.</p>