Legal Opinion

Polonofsky v. Dobrosky

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 28, 1933No. Appeal, 203PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

At the trial of this action of trespass to recover damages for injuries resulting from an automobile accident, the jury were unable to agree and were dismissed. The court thereupon granted defendant’s motion for judgment upon the whole record. Plaintiffs appeal.

The wife-plaintiff was a guest in the automobile driven by defendant and was injured when the car in which she was riding collided practically head-on with an automobile driven by one Melinsky. The accident occurred May 17,1932, shortly after 8 p. m., on a dry, clear evening. It was dusk and the lights of the machines were…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. O'Malley v. EaganWyoming Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Wilson v. Consolidated Dressed Beef Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  3. Weiss v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  4. Hayes Et Ux. v. SchomakerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  5. Adams v. FieldsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. DeLuca v. Manchester Laundry & Dry Cleaning Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  2. Mulheirn v. BrownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  3. Thompson v. GormanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  4. Sudol Et Ux. v. GorgaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  5. Walter Sowizral v. Mrs. Adele M. HughesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1964

22 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