Trego v. Pierce

Citations

• 119 Pa. 139
• 21 W.N.C. 568
• 12 A. 864
• 1888 Pa. LEXIS 535

Syllabus

<p>1. The object of the act of March 11, 1842, F. L. 62, relating to the duties of fence viewers, is to provide a summary remedy to keep partition fences from going into dilapidation. It is error, therefore, in an action to recover contribution for the rebuilding of such a fence, to admit evidence that the fence was not rebuilt upon the true line and to charge the jury that the plaintiff cannot recover if they so find.</p> <p>2. Where, in such an action, it appeared that after a report of fence viewers the defendant rebuilt his portion of the fence in substantial accordance therewith, and that the plaintiff, dissatisfied with the style and kind adopted, of her own motion and upon her own view took it down and built a new one in its place, she was not entitled to recover the cost thereof from the defendant.</p> <p>3. This court will not reverse for every error that falls into a cause in the hurry of a jury trial; some substantial injury must have been the actual or probable result of such error, to justify the disturbance of the judgment: Per Mr. Justice Paxson.</p>