Legal Opinion

Hellriegel v. Kaufmann & Baer Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 29, 1939No. Appeal, 240PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Me. Justice Baenes,

The plaintiff sustained injuries as the result of a fall which occurred as she was leaving the department store of defendant, in the City of Pittsburgh. The jury awarded her a verdict, upon which judgment was entered. This appeal by defendant is from the refusal of the court below to enter judgment in its favor non obstante veredicto, and presents the single question whether plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law.

On the morning of March 29, 1936, plaintiff, accompanied by her sister-in-law, entered the store by its main entrance to…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Dively v. Penn-Pittsburgh Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  2. Cathcart v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  3. Haddon v. SnellenburgSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  4. Walker v. Broad & Walnut Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  5. Fordyce v. White Star Bus LinesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Rogers v. Max Azen, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  2. Bartek v. GrossmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  3. Markle v. Robert Hall ClothesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  4. Falen Et Ux. v. Monessen Amusement Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
  5. Lewis v. Duquesne Inclined Plane Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942

9 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