History
  • No items yet
midpage
Roberts v. Swift
1 Yeates 209
Pa.
1793
Check Treatment
Per curiam.

We are all fully satisfied, that the direction of the judges was founded on sound law, and they very properly and fairly left the question “of request” to the jury under all the circumstances. In such a case, very slender testimony would satisfy ingenuous minds. It was a case of great hardship.

If the jury were satisfied from the whole of the evidence, that the services were done at the request of the testator, no matter what the plaintiff’s expectations were, the action may well be supported. The exception to the general rule is well marked in i Espin. 87, 88.

The damages are liberal, but not so outrageous as to justify the interposition of the court, in ordering a new trial. The * plaintiff, in the case before us, appears to have suffered r*oi £5 greatly, and to have been hardly dealt with by the tes- ^ tor.

Motion for a new trial denied, and per tot. cur.

Judgment pro querente.

Case Details

Case Name: Roberts v. Swift
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Date Published: Jan 15, 1793
Citation: 1 Yeates 209
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.