Ross v. Espy

Citations

• 66 Pa. 481
• 1871 Pa. LEXIS 63

Syllabus

<p>1. The only witness for the plaintiff was objected to as incompetent, admitted by the court “ reserving the right to exclude the testimony.” The testimony proved the plaintiff’s case; the court without excluding the testimony, directed the jury to find for the defendant. Held, to be error although the. witness was incompetent.</p> <p>2. The court should have charged directly on the competency of the witness.</p> <p>3. Evidence is admissible to show that at the time of an endorsement of a note, the first and second endorsers agreed that in case of loss they should bear it jointly.</p> <p>4. The contract of endorsement is implied by law from the blank endorsement and can be qualified by proof of a different agreement.</p> <p>5. The contract of endorsement is not subject to the rule which excludes proof to vary the terms of an express contract.</p>