Hileman v. Falck

Citations

• 263 Pa. 351
• 106 A. 633
• 1919 Pa. LEXIS 430

Syllabus

<p>Trial — Instructions to jury — Statement of distinction between common law actions of trespass and trover.</p> <p>1. It is not error for a trial judge to explain to tbe jury the distinction between the common law actions of trespass and trover and to state that the case seemed to include a charge of both.</p> <p>2. In an action for alleged unlawful taking and use of a steam roller by defendant, who contracted with plaintiffs agent to operate the roller over a piece of road and consented that the roller might be placed in his yard rather than.remain in the highway when the weather conditions prevented its return, it is not error to state to the jury that the only evidence of an unlawful taking consisted in the fact that the roller was found in defendant’s possession, and that if the jury believed the evidence for defendant, the taking in the first place was not unlawful where the testimony of the agent, which was corroborated by two witnesses, was in effect that he had entire charge of the roller with the right to rent it.</p> <p>Conversion — Evidence—Use—Claim of title.</p> <p>3. There was no evidence of conversion of the roller, where it was shown that, although defendant permitted it to be placed in his yard by the agent of the owner, he never used it after it was placed there, nor claimed title to it, nor refused to permit the owner to remove it, and that he returned it to the owner after suit was brought.</p> <p>Principal and agent — Competency to prove agency-^ — Witness— Evidence.</p> <p>4. An agent is a competent witness to testify as to the existence of the agency and the extent of his authority.</p>