Meyer v. S. R. Moss Co.

Citations

• 66 Pa. Super. 149
• 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 213

Syllabus

<p>Contract — Bale—Written contract — Evidence.</p> <p>In an action to recover the price of a cigar humidor which the plaintiff had agreed to install under á contract in writing “the material and work to he first-class in every respect, and the humidor to give perfect results,” a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff will be sustained where the evidence for the plaintiff shows that the work and materials were of good quality, and that with proper attention the humidor would keep cigars in good condition, while the evidence for the defendant tends to show that the humidor did not produce perfect results inasmuch as it was sometimes too moist, and other times excessively dry. In such a case it is proper to permit witnesses for the plaintiff to testify as to the construction of the humidor, and although not ever having operated the one in question, to testify that if proper attention were given to one of its design and construction, perfect results would follow.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Trial—Improper remarks of counsel — Discretion.</p> <p>The appellate court will not review the discretion of the trial court in refusing to withdraw a juror because of improper remarks of counsel, where the defendants, while not claiming there was anything inherently vicious in the remarks maintained, they became so by reason of their relation to some extraneous matter not appearing-on the record, but the judge finds that there was no relation between the remarks and the extraneous matter.</p>