Legal Opinion

Dickey v. Boggs & Buhl, Inc.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 5, 1942No. Appeal, 179PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Parker,

The appellant brought this action in trespass against the two defendants for personal injuries. On trial and at the conclusion of her proofs, she took a voluntary non-suit as to the Bell Telephone Company and the trial court entered a compulsory nonsuit as to Boggs & Buhl. She complains of the refusal of her motion to take off the compulsory nonsuit. We find no error.

The plaintiff was in the store of Boggs & Buhl when she had occasion to use the facilities of the utility. A clerk directed her to the telephone. The instrument was located on a table at the rear of a…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Norris v. Philadelphia Electric Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  2. MacK v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  3. Fisher v. AmsterdamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  4. Morgan, Admx. v. PetersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Miller v. HickeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  2. Rockey v. ErnestSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  3. Dudley v. Montgomery Ward & Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Koller v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  5. Reay, Adr. v. Montg.-Ward Co., Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API