Citizens' Gas Co. v. Whitney

Citations

• 232 Pa. 592
• 81 A. 804
• 1911 Pa. LEXIS 768

Syllabus

<p>Ejectment — Notice of previous unrecorded conveyance — Appeals— Technical error induced by appellant — Ground for reversal.</p> <p>1. In an action of ejectment the case is for the jury and a verdict for the plaintiff will be sustained where there is evidence to warrant a finding that the two defendants had notice of an outstanding unrecorded conveyance of the premises to the plaintiff at the time of their respective purchases.</p> <p>2. In such a case, after there has been a just and fair trial upon the merits, a reversal is not made necessary by the fact that the court, induced by counsel for one of the defendants against objection of the plaintiff, erroneously ruled that the testimony of the other defendant, called by the plaintiff, as under cross-examination, should in no wise affect the other defendant, where the latter’s counsel, without relying on the ruling, treated the witness as competent for all purposes, and in cross-examination elicited an answer upon a material point, which it made part of its case.</p> <p>3. As a general rule a party who has induced the court to commit an error, against which the other side has protested, is thereby precluded from availing himself of it in any court of review.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Separate trials — Discretion of cburt — Ejectment— Joint defense.</p> <p>4. The granting of a severance in an action of ejectment rests on the discretion of the trial judge and his ruling will not be reversed unless there has been abuse in the exercise of that discretion.</p> <p>5. A severance in an action of ejectment is properly refused where one of the defendants is the lessor of the other, and the return to the writ shows both to be in possession of the premises; and they file a joint appearance and a joint answer setting up the privity of the title, and prepare all their pleadings with a view to making a joint defense, there being no reason why they should not so do.</p>