Laubaugh v. Pennsylvania Railroad

Citations

• 28 Pa. Super. 247
• 1905 Pa. Super. LEXIS 176

Syllabus

<p>Damages — Measure of damages — Destruction of personal property — Negligence.</p> <p>In an action to recover damages for goods negligently destroyed, where it appears that the property destroyed has no market value at the place of its destruction, all pertinent facts and circumstances are admissible in evidence that tend to establish its real and ordinary value at the time of its destruction, such facts as will furnish the jury, who alone determine the amount, with such relevant data as will enable them reasonably and intelligently to arrive at affair value; to this end the original cost of the property, the manner, in which it had been used, its general condition and quality and percentage of its depreciation since its purchase or erection, from use, damage, decay or otherwise, are all elements of proof to be submitted to the jury to aid them in ascertaining its value.</p> <p>Evidence — Witness—Credibility—Testimony taken at former trial.</p> <p>The appellate court will not reverse a judgment because of the refusal to admit in evidence the testimony of a witness taken at a former trial, where it appears that the facts testified to by the witness at the second trial were established by the testimony of other witnesses, and that the claims in the two trials were distinctly, different under the pleadings.</p> <p>Bankruptcy — Suit by trustee — Presumption of regularity of proceedings.</p> <p>In an action by a trustee in bankruptcy the presumption is in favor of the regularity of all proceedings leading up to the appointment of the trustee in bankruptcy, and that as trustee he complied with all the requirements of the law and was qualified to act.</p>