Legal Opinion

Lang v. Casey Et Ux.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 24, 1937No. Appeal, 227PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

Appellee recovered a verdict against the appellants, husband and wife, as damages for the wrongful death of her husband due to the unlawful conduct of appellants in furnishing him intoxicating liquor, though he was known by them to be a man of intemperate habits. The questions involved here raise but one issue — whether there was sufficient evidence to sustain the findings that the deceased was known to defendants as a person of intemperate habits and was furnished intoxicating liquors by them which caused his death, and that appellants were engaged in a joint business enterprise.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Buehler v. United States Fashion Plate Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Fink v. GarmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1861
  3. Davies v. McKnight, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1892
  4. Bier v. MyersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
  5. Wilson v. HessSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1921

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Schelin v. GoldbergSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  2. McKinney v. FosterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  3. Benz v. HeckmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  4. Benz v. Heckman (Et Al.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  5. Brink v. James Arthur Ashe Post, VFW, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Armstrong County1949

2 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