Legal Opinion

Von Der Heide v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Transportation

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 1, 1998No. 98 M.D. Appeal Docket 1997PublishedCited by 63 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NIGRO, Justice.

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) appeals from the Commonwealth Court’s reversal of the trial court’s grant of a new trial pursuant to PennDOT’s post trial motions, finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to instruct the jury on superseding cause. For the following reasons, we find that a jury instruction on superseding cause was not required and thus affirm the order of the Commonwealth Court.

Appellee Alice Von der Heide, on behalf of her late husband’s estate, commenced an action for his wrongful death…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Stewart v. MottsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  2. Voitasefski v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
  3. Elder v. OrluckSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  4. Trude v. MartinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  5. Clack v. Commonwealth, Department of TransportationCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1998

3Cited by63 opinions

  1. Harman Ex Rel. Harman v. BorahSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  2. O'Donnell Ex Rel. Mitro v. Allstate Insurance Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  3. Torres v. El Paso Electric Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Mount Olivet Tabernacle Church v. Edwin L. Wiegand DivisionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  5. Commonwealth v. VeonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2016

58 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