Hufnagle v. Wilkes-Barre Railway Co.

Citations

• 261 Pa. 599
• 104 A. 738
• 1918 Pa. LEXIS 796

Syllabus

<p>Practice, C. P. — Trials—‘Interested witness — Cause of injury— Charge — Sufficiency — Failure to request further instructions — Court and jury — Assignments of error — Incomplete quotation — Insufficient assignments — Practice, Supreme Court.</p> <p>1. One who has no personal interest in the pending suit, is not an interested witness merely because he has a suit growing out of the same accident against both parties thereto.</p> <p>2. It is for the jury alone to decide whether facts testified to are established by the evidence.</p> <p>3. As assignment of error is bad which quotes only a portion of the-general charge dealing with the subject-matter of which complaint is made.</p> <p>4. A failure to explain the-difference between interested and disinterested testimony is not reversible error, where appellant remained silent when asked if there was anything further to which he desired the attention of the jury to be called.</p>