Legal Opinion

Glomb v. Glomb

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 10, 1987No. 00700PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*209MONTEMURO, Judge:

Appellants John and Marie Glomb challenge the denial of their post-trial motions. A jury found that the Glombs had negligently hired and retained appellee Sherry Ginosky to care for the Glombs’ one-year-old daughter, appellee Tia Marie Glomb. Tia Marie, through her guardian ad litem, instituted this action against her parents, who in turn joined Ms. Ginosky as an additional defendant. We address two issues on appeal: (1) whether the trial court properly refused to allow the jury to apportion liability between the Glombs and Ms. Ginosky; and (2) whether the $1.5 million jury…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Delahanty v. First Pennsylvania Bank, N.A.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  2. Reilly v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  3. Falco v. PADOSSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  4. Skoda v. West Penn Power Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  5. Lasprogata v. QuallsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979

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

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. Corbett v. WeisbandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  2. Taylor v. Celotex Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  3. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. ParrishKentucky Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Harsh v. PetrollSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  5. SHV Coal, Inc. v. Continental Grain Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

40 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