Lohr v. Somerset & Cambria R. R.

Citations

• 2 Monag. 507
• 14 A. 269
• 1888 Pa. LEXIS 779

Syllabus

<p>In an action of assumpsit by a land-owner for payment for land deeded to a railroad company in consideration of one dollar and the general advantages accruing by reason of the location of the road, where plaintiff claimed that, at the time the deed was made, there was a parol agreement as an inducement for him to sign the deed that the company should pay him what the land was worth, and for fencing and damages, the supreme court will not disturb a judgment entered on a- verdict for defendant, where the case has been properly submitted to the jury on conflicting evidence as to whether such parol agreement was made or not.</p> <p>In such an action, there could be no recovery for mere inconvenience to plaintiff, as his claim was based on the alleged promise, and therefore the jury could not consider either the advantages or disadvantages arising by reason of the construction of the road.</p> <p>Not decided, whether the amendment at the costs of plaintiff, in this case, was proper, under the Act of May to, 1871.</p>