Pittsburgh Bridge Co. v. Brown

Citations

• 2 Monag. 341
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 1371

Syllabus

<p>An assignment of error, embracing all the testimony taken on a commission, will not be sustained where part of the testimony is relevant and proper.</p> <p>Defendant entered into a contract to “ upset ” some iron rods, which the plaintiff was to furnish to parties in Chicago. Plaintiff furnished the rods to the defendants at Pittsburgh. After the work of “ upsetting ” had been done, the rods were shipped to Chicago without being tested at Pittsburgh. They were subsequently returned to the plaintiffs as unfit for use. Plaintiffs claimed that they had furnished good rods which the defendants had spoiled in the process of “upsetting.” They offered evidence of various parties taken under a commission to Chicago, to the effect that the rods were unfit for use and had been spoiled in “ upsetting.” A specimen of the rods was offered in evidence and admitted under objection that they were not sufficiently identified. It appeared in evidence that the superintendent of defendant had examined the specimen and had said that, if it was inferior, it was due to the hurried manner in which the work had been done in defendant’s blacksmith shop. The plaintiff produced a number of witnesses, who testified that the work was bad. A number of defendants’ witnesses denied this. The court submitted the whole case to the jury. Held, not to be error.</p>