History
  • No items yet
midpage
Pittenger v. Kennedy
23 A. 1039
Pa.
1892
Check Treatment
Per Curiam,

Upon the argument of this case at bar it became apparent that an important paper, essential to a proper understanding of the subject of dispute, bad been omitted from tbe appellant’s paper book. The defendant (appellee) excepted to the sufficiency of appellant’s paper book, for the following reasons, viz.: “Because it omits a material part of tbe evidence, viz., tbe map offered in evidence by defendant, identified as defendant’s exhibit D, although it is referred to both in the charge of the court and appellant’s argument.” In Graff v. Barrett, 29 Pa. 477, it was held that, where an assignment of error depends upon a consideration of tbe evidence, such evidence must be made a part of, and returned with, the record. Tbis is familiar law. Where a case depends upon the evidence, and a material portion of it is omitted, we cannot do otherwise than affirm the judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Pittenger v. Kennedy
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Date Published: Mar 28, 1892
Citation: 23 A. 1039
Docket Number: Appeal, No. 71
Court Abbreviation: Pa.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.