Legal Opinion

Finnin v. Neubert

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 24, 1954No. Appeal, 72PublishedCited by 39 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Bell,

This is an appeal from a compulsory nonsuit. In such an appeal plaintiffs must be given the benefit *42of all the favorable testimony and every reasonable inference of fact arising therefrom; and all conflicts therein must be resolved in their favor: Parker v. McCrory Stores Corp., 376 Pa. 122, 101 A. 2d 377; Lewis v. Quinn, 376 Pa. 109, 101 A. 2d 382.

All of the facts, including the place and the cause of the accident, are very meagre, but viewed in the light of the foregoing authorities may be thus stated:

Defendant was driving his automobile south on Constitution…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Lanni v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  2. Miller v. HickeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  3. Ebersole v. BeistlineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  4. Lewis v. QuinnSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  5. Brusis v. HenkelsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954

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

3Cited by39 opinions

  1. Smith v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  2. Kazatsky v. King David Memorial Park, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  3. Donaldson v. MaffucciSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  4. Crane v. NealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  5. Gift v. PalmerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958

34 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