Mewes v. Crescent Pipe Line Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania October 7, 1895

Mewes v. Crescent Pipe Line Co., 170 Pa. 369 (Pa. 1895)

32 A. 1083; 1895 Pa. LEXIS 1414

Dean, Fell, McCollum, Mitchell, Sterrett

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

This case was argued with No. 461, January term, 1894, in which an opinion affirming the judgment has just been filed. The first and second specifications relate to the competency of the witnesses mentioned therein respectively. We are not convinced that there was any error in receiving the testimony of the one or rejecting that of the other. Nor do we think there was any error in the learned judge’s answer to the defendant’s point recited in the third specification.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: Josiah E. Mewes v. Crescent Pipe Line Co.
Status: Published
Syllabus: Pipe line — Eminent domain — Evidence—Expert witness — Competency of witness. A witness is competent to testify as to the damages caused by the construction of a pipe line across a farm, where it appears that he lived in the neighborhood, and knew the character of the soil of the farm, the kind and quality of the improvements upon it and the selling prices, and the prices for which lands had been offered in the locality during the two years prior to the trial; but one who has never seen the farm is not competent to testify as to the effect of the construction and maintenance of a pipe line upon his own farm. It is not improper for the court to refuse to charge in an action to recover damages for the construction of a pipe line, that greater weight is to be given to the testimony of those who have knowledge and observation of several sales of land upon which pipe lines had been constructed than of a witness who had knowledge of but one such sale. The question in such a case is one for the determination of the jury under all the evidence, and the credibility they may attach to testimony of the respective witnesses.