Jessop v. Ivory

Citations

• 158 Pa. 71
• 27 A. 840
• 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1544

Syllabus

<p>Corporations — Conditional subscription to stock — Promoters—Evidence— Question for jury.</p> <p>In an action against a promoter of a corpoi'ation to recover the amount of a stock subscription paid by plaintiff as a subscriber, plaintiff claimed that when the' subscription was made defendant agreed that the money should be returned to plaintiff if he were dissatisfied. Plaintiff averred that under this agreement he had rescinded the contract. Defendant offered evidence which tended to show that plaintiff had directed him to sell the stock at a price named, that plaintiff had also given a proxy to vote his stock, and that he had attended and participated in the business of a stockholders’ meeting. Held, that the case was for the jury, with instructions that the facts alleged by defendant were prima facie acts of ownership inconsistent with the demand for rescission, and that the jury were at liberty to infer from them an acquiescence in defendant’s refusal, and an abandonment or waiver of such demand.</p> <p>Contract — Parol agreement — Evidence.</p> <p>A written agreement is presumed to contain the whole contract between the parties, and the jury must so find, unless satisfied by clear and convincing evidence that another part of the agreement was in fact made at the time, but by fraud, mistake or accident omitted from the writing.</p> <p>Evidence— Cross-examination — Discretion of court — Review.</p> <p>Collateral matters tending to prejudice the other parties in the minds of the jury should not be brought out on cross-examination, merely for the purpose of laying ground for subsequent contradiction to affect the credibility of a witness. But as considerable latitude must be allowed to the discretion of the court in the matter of cross-examination, the Supreme Court will not reverse unless convinced of clear error in the exercise of this discretion.</p>