Cunningham v. Ray

Citations

• 263 Pa. 492
• 106 A. 884
• 1919 Pa. LEXIS 460

Syllabus

<p>Vendor and vendee — Exchange of real estate — Fraudulent representations — Measure of damages — Net rentals — Evidence.</p> <p>1. Where, on an issue to determine what was due ón a judgment confessed on a bond accompanying a mortgage, it appears that plaintiff, owning an apartment house, entered into an agreement in writing with defendants, owning a farm, for the exchange of the two properties, that the agreement stated no agreed values, but that defendants should execute to plaintiff the bond and mortgage on the apartment house, being the bond on which the judgment was entered, and the defendants claim that they were fraudulently misinformed by plaintiff as to the net income from the apartment house, defendants’ measure of damages for the deceit is, in the absence of any evidence of a special contractual agreement to the contrary, the difference between the real, or market value of the property at the time of the transaction, and the higher or fictitious value, at which it was taken in exchange.</p> <p>2. In such a case it was not error for the trial judge to exclude a witness who undertook to base an estimate of depreciation of value solely upon a difference in net rentals.</p> <p>3. While, possibly, when all the relevant surroundings are known to a witness, rentals may be considered as an element in forming an opinion of the market value of the property, yet they never can constitute an exclusive standard for the purpose.</p> <p>Practice, G. P. — Trial—Exclusion of evidence — Assignment of error — Exception.</p> <p>4. Where evidence is excluded because the party who offered it practically withdraws his offer, but the trial judge voluntarily notes an exception, the appellate court cannot consider the ruling if the record shows that it was not assigned as error.</p> <p>Practice, O. P. — Trial—Review—Confusion at trial.</p> <p>5. An appellant is not entitled to claim that he should have another trial, because of an alleged confusion at the trial under review, rega