Loney Et Ux. v. Denenberg
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Argued October 4, 1949. Samuel Loney and Mary Loney, his wife, appellees, instituted this action to recover damages for injuries sustained by the wife when she slipped and fell as she was leaving the place of business of appellants. At trial, at which appellants offered no testimony, the jury rendered verdicts for both appellees. These appeals are from the judgment of the court below dismissing appellant's motion for judgment n. o. v.
The evidence must be viewed in a light most favorable to appellees, resolving all conflicts in the testimony in their favor, and according them the benefit of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Foley v. the Pittsburgh-Des Moines Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
- Sladkin Et Ux. v. Greene Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
- Tremaine, Exrx. v. H. K. Mulford Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Biehl, Admr. v. RaffertySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
- Miller v. Duffee Transfer Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
3Cited by6 opinions
- Treadway v. Ebert Motor Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Pinkshaw v. Cambria TownshipSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
- Gripp v. Lit BrothersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Burton v. Horn & Hardart Baking Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
- Burton v. Horn & Hardart Baking Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.