Burkhard v. Pennsylvania Water Co.

Citations

• 243 Pa. 369
• 90 A. 157
• 1914 Pa. LEXIS 632

Syllabus

<p>Practice, Supreme Court — Appeals—Assignments of error — Defective assignments.</p> <p>1. Assignments of error constitute an essential part of the pleadings before the Supreme Court and as such must be so complete in themselves as not to require reference to other parts of the record; an assignment charging error in the order of the court below over-, ruling exceptions to a bond filed in condemnation proceedings is in. palpable disregard of rule 26, where it fails to show the character of the bond filed or what exceptions were taken thereto.</p> <p>Water companies — Eminent domain — Bond to secure damages— Evidence — Witnesses—Experts.</p> <p>2. On appeal from an award of a jury of view in proceedings to condemn property for the use of a water company, exceptions to the bond filed to secure the payment of damages, which complained that no effort was made to agree with the owners of the property as to the amount of damages sustained are properly dismissed, as the filing of the bond is evidence of the inability of the parties to agree on the damages. ■</p> <p>3. The court makes no error in such case in refusing to allow an expert witness called by the plaintiffs to give his opinion as to the value of land taken where the witness on cross-examination and in reply to a question by the court, stated that he did not have and did not pretend to have any knowledge of the market value of the land taken or of the value of the land in its vicinity.</p>