Sprout v. Kirk

Citations

• 80 Pa. Super. 514
• 1923 Pa. Super. LEXIS 198

Syllabus

<p>Justices of the peace — Trespass—Trespass vi et armis — Automobiles — Collision—Jurisdiction—Act of March 22, 1814, 6 8m. L. 182, Act of May 25, 1887, P. L. 271.</p> <p>A justice of the peace has jurisdiction in an action of trespass ■where the injury is by the direct act of the defendant whether done wilfully or negligently.</p> <p>The action of trespass for the recovery of damages for injury done or committed on real or personal estate of which justices of the peace were given jurisdiction by the Act of March 22, 1814, 6 Sm. L. 182, was the action of trespass vi et armis, where the injury was immediate; their jurisdiction did not extend to injuries for the redress of which the action of trespass on the case was the appropriate and exclusive remedy.</p> <p>The Act of May 25, 1887, P. L. 271, which abolished the dis- ■ tinction between trespass vi et armis and trespass on the case, so far as it relates to procedure, did not extend the jurisdiction of justices of the peace to causes of action not theretofore embraced therein.</p> <p>Where, prior to the Act of 1887, the proper remedy for the recovery of damages would be trespass vi et armis, a justice of the peace has jurisdiction.</p> <p>Automobiles — Collision with farm wagón — Evidence—Case for fury.</p> <p>In an action of trespass to recover for damages to an automobile, caused by a collision with a farm wagon, the case is for the jury where the testimony is conflicting and the evidence in the case did not justify the court in declaring as matter of law that the plaintiff was guilty of negligence, or that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence.</p>