Wodock v. Robinson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 44, July T., 1891, by-plaintiff, Mary Wodock, from judgment of C. P. No. 4, Philadelphia -Co., Dec. T., 1890, No. 71, sustaining demurrer to statement, in favor of defendant, Sarah J. Robinson. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 44, July T., 1891, by-plaintiff, Mary Wodock, from judgment of C. P. No. 4, Philadelphia -Co., Dec. T., 1890, No. 71, sustaining demurrer to statement, in favor of defendant, Sarah J. Robinson. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. The facts appear by the opinion of the court below, Thayer, P. J., which was as follows: “ The defendant, in accordance with the reformed principles of pleading introduced into this state by the procedure act of 1887, was sued in an action of trespass in which the plaintiff seeks to recover consequential damages for a bodily injury…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The opinion of the learned judge of the court below, sustaining the defendant’s demurrer, is so clear and satisfactory, that we affirm the judgment for the reasons given by him.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by39 opinions
- Gianni v. Russell Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Lobozzo v. Adam Eidemiller, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
- O'shea v. New York, C. & St. L. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1901
- Union Storage Co. ex rel. Liverpool & London & Globe Insurance v. SpeckSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Ry. Co. v. Home Ins.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.