Halfman v. Penna. Boiler Ins.

Citations

• 160 Pa. 202
• 28 A. 837
• 1894 Pa. LEXIS 795

Syllabus

<p>Practice — Charge of court — Duty of counsel to ash court to correct charge —Review—Evidence.</p> <p>In an action against a corporation to recover the amount of an alleged loan, a verdict for plaintiff will not be reversed because the trial judge said to the jury that “ the payment to the company was conceded on all sides,” when there was no serious issue upon that question, and the testimony of the plaintiff was practically undisputed on the question of payment to the company, the evidence against such payment being merely inferential, and the judge not having been asked at the trial to modify the language which he used.</p> <p>In the above case the president of the company signed this writing which plaintiff offered in evidence: “I have this day received from William D. Hallman $2,000 in cash to be used for the Pennsylvania Boiler Insurance Company.” The court charged as follows: “ The paper which was given when the money was paid by Mr. Halfman acknowledges the receipt of the money to be used by the company. It states no time for repayment, and Mr. Miller, the president of the company, said no agreement for repayment was made. Perhaps he meant that no time for repayment was set.” Held, not to be error.</p> <p>Defendant offered evidence which tended to show that Halfman had made statements at various times of the debts of the company, to parties negotiating for the purchase of his stock, and that from these statements he had omitted his claim. Held, that it was not error for the court in the charge to refer to the evidence for plaintiff to the effect that he had not placed this claim among the others because he had no control of it, having assigned it to another person, there being testimony to that effect.</p>