Harrold v. Harrold

Citations

• 251 Pa. 303
• 96 A. 745
• 1916 Pa. LEXIS 463

Syllabus

<p>Landlord and tenant — Lease of farm — Agreement to pay rental —Instructions to jury.</p> <p>1. In an action by the owner of a farm against the tenant thereof for the agreed rental, consisting of one-third of the proceeds of the crops, -where defendant admitted the tenancy but averred that the agreement as to the rental had been changed, so as to provide that defendant should retain all the proceeds of the crops, but should keep the property in repair, the trial judge was not in error in charging the jury that the burden was upon defendant to prove an actual binding contract under which plaintiff had waived his right to what was otherwise clearly his property.</p> <p>2. In such case, where there was evidence of disinterested witnesses as to statements made by the plaintiff to persons, not in any way representing the defendant, as to his understanding of the contract, it was not reversible error to charge the jury that such statements “are not so important. Loose talk when you come to consider contractual obligations, is of but little value,” when the trial judge did not undertake to characterize the testimony of the witnesses as being nothing more than loose talk, but left to the jury to consider whether or not it amounted to more than that. .</p>