Kress House Moving Co. v. George Hogg Co.

Citations

• 263 Pa. 191
• 106 A. 351
• 1919 Pa. LEXIS 396

Syllabus

<p>Practice, O. P. — Pleadings—Evidence—Act of Mag 1¿, 1915, P. L. ¿88.</p> <p>1. The Practice Act of May 14,1915, P. L. 483, does not require the details of matters intended to be proved, or the evidence relied upon, to be set forth in the pleadings. If a defendant desires greater particularity, he should move against plaintiff’s reply in the manner provided by the statute.</p> <p>2. In an action to recover a balance on a contract for excavating and underpinning a building, where the defendant’s affidavit of defense avers that the building had sunk and swayed over the property line, causing damages to defendant, claimed as a set-off, and the plaintiff in his reply denies that the building either sank or swayed through his fault, the plaintiff may, at the trial, offer evidence to the effect that the machinery in the building had operated smoothly during the time plaintiff was engaged in performing his work, whereas this state of affairs did not continue when another builder, employed by defendant, took control. The reply was sufficient notice to support the admission of such evidence.</p> <p>3. A pleader is not obliged to aver his means of proof.</p> <p>Trial — Order of proof — Review.</p> <p>4. The order of the admission of evidence is a matter for the trial court which does not call for review, except in extreme cases.</p> <p>Contract — Impeding performance.</p> <p>5. One who impedes the performance of a contract by another cannot take advantage of his own wrong to prevent recovery.</p> <p>Appeals — Question involved — Assignments of error.</p> <p>6. Answers to points assigned as error will not be considered by the appellate court, if they are neither referred to in nor comprehended by appellant’s statement of the “questions involved.”</p>