Legal Opinion

Fudala v. Leedom

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 5, 1979No. 2709PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOWLING, Judge:

Appellant sought damages for injuries sustained in an automobile accident. He felt the jury’s award was too little and appeals to this court for a new trial limited to damages only. The main support for his claim of inadequacy is a personal colloquy engaged in by the trial court following the examination of one of the medical witnesses.

There was no real controversy as to liability; the critical issue being the extent of appellant’s injuries. Appellant *324sustained a fractured clavical, multiple right side rib fractures, a severely sprained wrist and a pneumothorax resulting when…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Dilliplaine v. Lehigh Valley Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  2. Commonwealth v. MymaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  3. Commonwealth v. SafisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  4. D'Allura v. PerriSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  5. McKown v. Demmler Properties, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Harman Ex Rel. Harman v. BorahSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  2. HARMAN ON BEHALF OF HARMAN v. BorahSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  3. Factor v. FactorSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Com. v. Manzoor, J.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
  5. Harman Ex Rel. Harman v. BorahSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000

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

Powered by the Exa API