Kurtz v. Haines

Citations

• 2 Monag. 328
• 15 A. 716
• 1888 Pa. LEXIS 797

Syllabus

<p>In. an action against a married woman for services, her declarations, made in the absence of the plaintiff, are inadmissible to prove that the plaintiff was employed by her husband against her consent.</p> <p>The proper practice, on the trial of a case, where a party desires the court to charge specifically on the testimony of a particular witness, is to call the attention of the court to the testimony by a point; and, in the absence of such a request, the supreme court will not reverse for a failure to call attention to certain testimony.</p> <p>The supreme court will not consider an assignment of error in the following form : “ The court erred in their answers to defendant’s several points. And in not affirming, without qualification, the ist, 2d, 3d and 5th points.”</p>