Pennsylvania Railroad v. Harl
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 165, April T., 1911, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Jefferson Co., Nov. T., 1909, No. 218, entering judgment for defendants non obstante veredicto in case of Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. McKean Harl and John G. Harl, trading as Mc-Kean, Harl & Son. Assumpsit for freight.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 165, April T., 1911, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Jefferson Co., Nov. T., 1909, No. 218, entering judgment for defendants non obstante veredicto in case of Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. McKean Harl and John G. Harl, trading as Mc-Kean, Harl & Son. Assumpsit for freight. Before Read, P. J. At the trial the jury rendered a verdict for plaintiff for $150.92. Subsequently the defendants moved for judgment non obstante veredicto, and for a new trial, although there had been no request on their part for binding directions, and no question of law had been reserved. The court…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
In view of the facts disclosed upon the hearing of the motion to quash the appeal we conclude that there was substantial compliance with the rule as to service of paper-books, and that the motion should be refused. It is so ordered.
The record does not show that there was a point submitted by the defendants for binding direction or that a question of law was reserved. This being so, the case was not within the Act of April 22, 1905, P. L. 286, or any other act authorizing the entry of judgment in favor of the defendants non obstante veredicto. If authority be needed for this…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Sulzner v. Cappeau-Lemley & Miller Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Philadelphia v. BilyeuSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Haley v. American Agricultural Chemical Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
3Cited by1 opinion
- Coyne v. Lackawanna CountySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913