Oberholtzer v. Heist

Citations

• 2 Monag. 396
• 16 A. 804
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 1381

Syllabus

<p>In an action of assumpsit for commissions on sale of horse, the evidence was to the effect that the plaintiff entrusted to the defendant four horses to sell at auction. On the morning of the sale, one of the horses ran away and broke up the wagon to which he was hitched. The defendant offered to prove damages done to the sale by runaway horse, as set-off. This evidence was rejected, but no exception taken. The court charged that the jury could allow defendant no credit for any loss of that sale, that there was no evidence from which they could estimate any damages to the defendant on that account, and that it was their duty to exclude it entirely from their consideration. Held, to be no reason for a reversal.</p> <p>In the above case, the defendant called witnesses to testify that the reputation of the plaintiffs for veracity was bad. The court charged : “A man’s reputation for truth and veracity is something that is precious to him. It may be his only recourse in a suit at law to sustain himself, and he ought not to be broken down unless the jury are convinced that his reputation is so bad that they could not safely rest their verdict upon his testimony.” The defendant complained that the effect of the charge was calculated to build up the character of the witness attacked, and to destroy that of the attacking party. Held, to be no cause for reversal.</p> <p>That the declaration concludes with a claim of damages in excess of the jurisdiction of a justice of the peace, on appeal, is no cause for reversal where the claim and the amount recovered are within such jurisdiction.</p>