Dimmick v. Sexton

Citations

• 125 Pa. 334
• 17 A. 345
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 721

Syllabus

<p>(а) On the trial of an issue in pursuance of a rule to open a judgment on a note for $500, the defendant introduced evidence from which he claimed to have paid the judgment in small payments of money, in grain and by a final compromise made in 1885 : the plaintiff admitted receiving two small payments, but denied the other payments alleged.</p> <p>(б) In the charge, the court, after reciting the history of the notes and judgments thereon and the plaintiff’s evidence in proof thereof, said that this entitled the plaintiff to recover if there were nothing else in the case. It then enumerated a number of the payments alleged to have been made by the defendant, stated that they amounted to $707, and then said: “ I call your attention to these leading items, and it is for you to say whether the defendant by any possibility, can be mistaken in relation to what he testifies to.”</p> <p>(c) The court further charged that the settlement if really made was as binding as a full payment; that the question was, who had told the truth about it; that there was nothing against the plaintiff’s character; that the jury should consider his evidence, and the evidence of the defendant and his wife and three other witnesses to the contrary, and should also consider the fact that a third person had testified to the defendant’s admission in 1886, that he owed the plaintiff $500.</p> <p>1. In this case, the verdict being for the defendant, on writ of error taken by the plaintiff claiming that the charge to the jury gave the impression that the evidence adduced by the defendant was more worthy of credit than that adduced by the plaintiff, the judgment was affirmed.</p>