Legal Opinion

Levine v. Rosen

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 27, 1990No. 2486PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OLSZEWSKI, Judge:

Appellants Melvin and Fay Levine, plaintiffs below, appeal a judgment in favor of defendant, Dr. Martin Rosen, in this medical malpractice action. Appellants object to three points of the jury charge: the instructions regarding con tributory negligence, irrelevant considerations, and the “two schools of thought” doctrine. We find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in charging the jury with respect to contributory negligence; however, we find that the other two instructions were erroneous. We reverse the judgment and remand for a new trial.

Appellee is a doctor…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Jones v. Montefiore HospitalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. Trent v. TrotmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  3. Furey v. Thomas Jefferson University HospitalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  4. McCullough v. Monroeville Home Ass'n, Post 820, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  5. Morganstein v. HouseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Jones v. ChidesterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
  2. Rizzo v. MichenerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  3. Angelo v. DiamontoniSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  4. Bonavitacola v. CluverSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  5. Levine v. RosenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

10 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