Bell v. Mykytiuk
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
KRAFT, District Judge.
In this negligence action,,in which jurisdiction was founded on diversity, the jury found both plaintiff and defendant negligent and returned verdicts for the defendant in the plaintiff’s suit and for the plaintiff as defendant in the counterclaim. Judgments were so entered on August 3, 1956.
Now before the court is plaintiff’s motion for new trial, filed August 11, 1956. This motion, which purported to reserve the right to file additional reasons later, cited but four reasons, to wit: that the verdict was against the (1) evidence, (2) weight of the evidence, (3) law, (4)…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Francis v. Southern Pacific Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Freid v. McGrathCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1942
- Fine v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1950
- Thomas v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Elia v. OlszewskiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Nelson H. Trout v. The Pennsylvania Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1962
- Jenkins v. NicholsonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1958
- William J. Bell and Margaret Bell v. Alexander Mykytiuk. William J. BellCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1957
- Brest v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1959