Case ID: pa_209/html/0284-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Pee Cueiam,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gundaker v. Ehrgott, Appellant.
    
      Equity—Equity practice—■Findings of fact—Review.
    
    Findings of fact by the trial judge in a suit in equity for an accounting, when based upon sufficient evidence, will not be reversed in the absence of manifest error.
    
      Equity■—Equity practice—-Equity pleading—Responsive answer—Evidence.
    
    The evidence of one witness with corroborating circumstances is sufficient to overcome a responsive answer to a bill in equity.
    Argued April 25, 1904.
    Appeal, No. 207, Jan. T., 1903, by defendant, from decree of C. P. Crawford Co., May T., 1901, No. 6, on bill in equity in case of Andrew M. Gundaker and Frank Ehrgott v. Jacob Ehrgott.
    Before Mitchell, C. J., Dean* Brown, Mestrezat and Thompson, J J.
    Affirmed.
    Bill in equity for an account. Before Thomas, P. J.
    
      Error assigned was in decreeing an account.
    
      Thomas Roddy,•with him C. F. Davenport and Otto Kohler, for appellant.
    
      
      George W. Haskins, with him II. J. Humes, E. Lowry Humes, Frank P. Bay, E. W. McArthur and John 0. McOlintoek, for appellee.
    May 23, 1904:
   Pee Cueiam,

The questions raised are questions of fact on which we have not been convinced that the court below was in error. The only question that can properly be called one of law was upon the weight of a responsive answer in equity, but as the court found corroborative circumstances in addition to the testimony against the answer we see no error in that respect.

Decree affirmed.