Legal Opinion

Meads Et Ux. v. Rutter

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 11, 1936No. Appeals, 5 and 6PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Baldrige, J.,

Arthur M. Meads and Erdine H. Meads, his wife, brought an action of trespass against Mark Rutter on account of property loss and personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident.

To the plaintiffs’ statement of claim, defendant filed an affidavit of defense, raising the question of law that he, at the time of the accident, was an employee of the Secretary of Highways of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania which has immunity from a suit without its consent. The court below decided adversely to the defendant, with leave to file a supplemental affidavit of defense. The…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Collins v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
  2. Simrell Et Ux. v. EschenbachSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  3. Elliott v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1874
  4. Urias v. Pennsylvania R. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
  5. Shoffner v. SchmerinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Kline v. Moyer and AlbertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  2. Ammlung v. PlattSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  3. Reese v. DanforthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  4. DuBree v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  5. Gaber Et Ux. v. WeinbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936

14 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