Sebastianelli Et Vir. v. C. Simpson Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Hirt, J.,
These actions, brought by plaintiffs for damages resulting from assaults by ¡alleged detectives in the qmploy of defendant and for false imprisonment, were tried together. The jury found in favor of each of the plaintiffs. They are satisfied with the moderate verdicts and defendant does not ask for a new trial. Defendant’s assignments of error all go to the refusal to enter judgments n.o-.v., raising the single question whether plaintiffs have met the burden upon them (Dobbs, Exr. v. Zink, 290 Pa. 243, 138 A. 758) of proving that defendant’^ employees, in the conduct in…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Rounds v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Orr v. William J. Burns International Detective AgencySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Singer Manufacturing Co. v. ChristianSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Jann v. Linton's LunchSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
- Pilipovich v. Pittsburgh Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Trawick v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
- Gajkowski v. International Brotherhood of TeamstersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Davila v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2017
- COLES v. SutphenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
- Defulio v. Spectaguard, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1995