Slike v. Sandrock

Citations

• 55 Pa. Super. 99
• 1913 Pa. Super. LEXIS 325

Syllabus

<p>Lease — Oil and gas lease — Alteration of instrument — Deed—Evidence— Fraud.</p> <p>1. In an action to recover for gas taken from a well on the plaintiff’s premises and used on other properties for drilling wells, the case' is for the jury, where it appears that the plaintiff executed in duplicate a lease for a well on his own premises to the defendant, that the copy which he retained contained a clause which provided that the defendant “shall have sufficient gas for drilling and all operating purposes on this, and a joining lease free of charge;” that the copy delivered to the defendant and recorded by him showed an addition of the letter “e” to the word “this,” and the letter “s” to the word “lease”; that it was intended that both papers should be identical; and that both plaintiff and his son testified that the plaintiff had refused to sign a lease giving the defendant gas for use on adjoining leases, but had agreed to give him “gas on a joining lease.”</p> <p>2. The meaning of the maxim that great liberality of evidence is to be allowed in the trial of questions of fraud, is that every circumstance in the condition and relation of the parties, and every act and declaration of the person charged with the fraud shall be competent evidence if, in the opinion of the judicial mind, it bears such a relation to the transaction under investigation as in its nature is calculated to persuade the jury that the allegation of fraud is or is not well founded.</p>