Russell v. First National Bank

Citations

• 78 Pa. Super. 371
• 1922 Pa. Super. LEXIS 120

Syllabus

<p>Evidence — Collateral issues — Relevancy—Admissibility.</p> <p>In the trial of an action of assumpsit by a receiver of a defunct partnership to recover the amount of certain checks drawn on the partnership funds, which were alleged to be forged, it was error to admit testimony that one of the partners had deposited funds to his personal account in amounts not greatly different from the amounts of the checks the day one of the checks was cashed, where there was no evidence that he forged the check in question, where the check was not produced at the trial and where the plaintiff offered no evidence as to how it was signed. Evidence of such a character raised an issue collateral to the one raised in the pleadings and its admission constituted reversible error.</p> <p>In such action it was error to admit evidence that the name of one of the partners appearing on the signature card left with the bank was forged, and in the handwriting of the other partner, where there was no evidence that the latter ever had a card in his possession or ever had any opportunity to add a name to it after it had passed into the custody of the officers of the bank.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Charge of court — Sufficiency.</p> <p>In an action against a bank by a receiver of a partnership to recover the amount of checks drawn on partnership funds, it was error for the court, in its charge to the jury, to refer to one of the partners as having “got into the penitentiary over this transaction,” when there was no evidence in the case that such partner had in fact been confined iñ the penitentiary or that he had ever been indicted for or convicted of the commission of a crime in relation to this transaction, or any other one that would have had any bearing on the solution of the question in hand.</p>