Legal Opinion

Rice v. Shuman

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 16, 1986No. 165 E.D. Appeal Docket 1985PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*207OPINION

NIX, Chief Justice.

The instant discretionary appeal requires this Court to pass upon the claim of Dr. David Shuman, an original defendant in a personal injury action who was unable to testify at the trial due to injuries sustained in the accident in question, that the trial court was required to charge the jury of a presumption of due care that arose in his favor. We granted this appeal to pass upon the broader question of the continuing vitality of a presumption of due care arising in the favor of a deceased or incapacitated defendant in view of the enactment of a comparative…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Watkins v. Prudential InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  2. Jones v. Montefiore HospitalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  3. Cuthbert v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  4. Heffernan v. RosserSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  5. Auel v. WhiteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Aloe Coal Company and Commercial Union Insurance Company v. Clark Equipment Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
  2. In Re SmithCourt of Judicial Discipline of Pennsylvania · 1996
  3. In re: Thomas C. Wettach v.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2016
  4. Commonwealth v. BenzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  5. Gaul v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

11 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