High v. Berret

Citations

• 148 Pa. 261
• 23 A. 1004
• 1892 Pa. LEXIS 965

Syllabus

<p>Deceit — Sale of stock — False representations.</p> <p>There can he no recovery for deceit in the sale of stock without proof that the sale was effected by means of representations made to the buyer, which were known to the seller to be false.</p> <p>Proof — Witnesses—fury.</p> <p>Where there is evidence sufficient to take a case to the jury, and it has been properly submitted, their decision of the question is final.</p> <p>The appearance and manner of a witness is part of his testimony, and the jury having the witnesses before them, are in a position to settle their credibility by tests that are much more satisfactory than can be applied by the court in reviewing the printed testimony.</p> <p>Deceit — Measure of dam,ayes — Speculative profits.</p> <p>The measure of plaintiff’s damages in an action for deceit in the sale of stock, is the loss which the deceit practiced upon him inflicted; that is, the difference between the real value of the stock at the time of the sale and the fictitious value at which he was induced to purchase.</p> <p>Ilis actual loss does not include the extravagant dreams which proved illusory, and which he may have been induced to entertain by reason of the representations which were made to him, but simply the money he has parted with without receiving an equivalent therefor.</p> <p>Error in trial — Excessive verdict — Subsequent reduction by the court.</p> <p>Where the trial judge, through an erroneous view of the law, improperly admitted testimony and erroneously charged the jury, with the result that there was a recovery both for actual loss and anticipated speculation; but the court subsequently corrected this error by requiring the plaintiff to remit so much of the verdict as represented the speculation, leaving it to stand for the difference; substantial justice having been reached, the court on appeal will not interfere with the verdict as reduced.</p>