McFadden v. Rausch

Citations

• 119 Pa. 507
• 13 A. 459
• 1888 Pa. LEXIS 573

Syllabus

<p>1. On the trial of an action to recover for injuries to real estate caused by the negligence of defendant’s employees, the court charged the jury that there was no dispute as to the plaintiff being entitled to recover something, and that the only question in the case was as to the amount of damages: Held,</p> <p>That, as the case showed that the plaintiff’s title and the cause of action were not denied and that the only subject mooted at the trial and about which there was any conflicting evidence, was the amount of damages to be recovered, and no question raised at the time as to the correctness of the instruction, it was not error.</p> <p>2. A claim for exemplary damages was submitted to the jury based upon proof of declarations made by a person about the place of the injury, but not made in the presence of defendant. The jury returned a verdict for a sum certain for actual damages, a sum certain for exemplary damages,- and for a sum certain the aggregate of both. On error, Held,</p> <p>That, the testimony being inadmissible, the submission of-the question of exemplary damages based upon it, was erroneous and judgment should be entered eliminating the sum returned as for exemplary damages.</p> <p>3. An assignment of error, based upon the admission of testimony, alleged to be incompetent under the pleadings, will not be considered when the pleadings are not placed before the court by the plaintiff in error.</p> <p>4. Whether a master is liable to exemplary damages for an injury resulting from the wanton recklessness of a servant, not decided.</p>