Legal Opinion
Solomon v. White Motor Company
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided July 18, 1957No. Civ. A. 12736PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
McILVAINE, District Judge.
At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s ease in respect to liability, the defendant had filed a motion for a directed verdict. When such a motion is filed:
“* * * we are concerned solely with whether the testimony on behalf of the plaintiff, and reasonable inference to be drawn from it in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, made out a prima facie case allowing the plaintiff to have a jury pass upon his cause of action.” Gold v. Groves, 3 Cir., 1950, 182 F.2d 767, 769.
The plaintiff alleges in his complaint as follows:
“Seventh: The plaintiff avers that The White…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- MacPherson v. . Buick Motor Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Loop v. . LitchfieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- Mannsz v. MacWhyte Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1946
- Gorman v. Murphy Diesel Co.Superior Court of Delaware · 1942
- Lynch v. International Harvester Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1932
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Barich v. OttenstrorMontana Supreme Court · 1976
- Emmett W. Pryor and Pacific Employers Insurance Company v. Lee C. Moore, CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1959
- Smith v. Hobart Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1962
- Howard Smith v. The Hobart Manufacturing Company, and Third-Party v. Holiday Frosted Food Company, Third-Party Howard Smith v. The Hobart Manufacturing Company, and Third-Party v. Holiday Frosted Food Company, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1962