History
  • No items yet
midpage
Farwell v. Kohler
1 Pennyp. 94
Pa.
1881
Check Treatment
Per Curiam:

We find no error in the charge of the learned Court. There was no evidence in the case fixing the southern line of the tract. There was no official survey produced showing either the lines or the adjoiners, and if there was some testimony as to the northern line of the Willing tract that proved nothing. Under these circumstances, when Kohler acted under the information given to him by Mayers, to whom he was referred by Farwell, and who directed him to the Baird line, even if that was a mistake of Mayers, it would be a very harsh measure of justice to deny Kohler compensation for the timber which he had actually cut and delivered under his contract.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Farwell v. Kohler
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Date Published: Jun 7, 1881
Citation: 1 Pennyp. 94
Docket Number: No. 135
Court Abbreviation: Pa.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.