Shirley v. Keagy

Citations

• 126 Pa. 282
• 17 A. 607
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 870

Syllabus

<p>(a) In an action on a note given to two partners in payment for a stock of goods, the defendant claimed to set off damages sustained by him in a loss of business through an alleged breach by one of said partners of their joint and several contract, made at the time of the purchase, not to enter again into the same business.</p> <p>1. In such ease, the defendant having had foil knowledge'of the quality and value of the goods, when he purchased, testimony on his behalf that the goods were old and not worth the amount of the note, was inadmissible to show damages sustained by him through plaintiffs breach of contract.</p> <p>2. The defendant was not entitled to set off against the note the depreciation in value as a business stand of real estate in which his store was kept, and which in an independent transaction he had purchased from one of the partners plaintiffs.</p> <p>3. The plaintiffs having adduced evidence that the defendant’s loss of business was attributable to his habits of intoxication and inattention to business, testimony on behalf of defendant that, before the purchase, one of the plaintiffs was intemperate and yet they did a good business, was inadmissible.</p> <p>4. In such case, it was not error to charge the jury that the defendant was entitled to be compensated fully and fairly for the damages sustained through the breach of plaintiff's contract if proved, but that the jury were restricted by the evidence and allowed no latitude in assessing damages outside of it or beyond it.</p>