Hale v. Hale

Citations

• 32 Pa. Super. 37
• 1906 Pa. Super. LEXIS 281

Syllabus

<p>Practice, C. P. — Pleading—Statement of claim — Evidence—Allegata et probata — Variance.</p> <p>The procedure act of 1887 requires that the declarations in assumpsit and trespass shall be a concise statement of the plaintiff’s demand. It should be not only concise, but precise; exhibiting with accuracy and completeness the ground on which recovery is sought. It is hot enough that the evidence may show a cause of action; it must show the cause of action laid in the declaration. The plaintiff does not recover on the proofs alone; he recovers secundum allegata et probata.</p> <p>In an action of assumpsit where the statement sets forth a claim for services rendered as bookkeeper and salesman, and the proof on the part of the plaintiff related wholly to an alleged partnership between the plaintiff and the defendant, a verdict and judgment for plaintiff cannot be sustained.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Trial—Disorderly conduct of witness.</p> <p>Where a plaintiff on the witness stand persistently charges crimes to his brother, the defendant, that had no possible relation to the questions at issue, and constantly puts in arguments and tries to throw slurs upon persons connected with the case, the court should entertain a motion to withdraw a juror and continue the case.</p>