Walsh v. Wilkes-Barre
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 123, Jan. T., 1906, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., June T., 1902, No. 212, on verdict for plaintiff in case of John Walsh v. City of Wilkes-Barre. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained on a defective sidewalk in the city of Wilkes-Barre.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 123, Jan. T., 1906, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., June T., 1902, No. 212, on verdict for plaintiff in case of John Walsh v. City of Wilkes-Barre. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained on a defective sidewalk in the city of Wilkes-Barre. Before Lynch, P. J. At the trial and after the testimony was completed defendant’s counsel said: “ Before the court charges the jury, I wish to file the following affidavit: ” “ James L. Lenahan, being duly sworn according to law, says that John T. Lenahan, counsel for the plaintiff,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Mestrezat,
For the reasons given in the opinion handed down herewith in Wagner v. Hazle Township, ante, p. 219, we are compelled to reverse this judgment for the improper remark of appellee’s counsel to the jury which was manifestly prejudicial to the defendant. It was wholly immaterial and irrelevant in the trial of this cause who might be ultimately liable for the damages recovered in the case, and the statement of the appellee’s counsel to the jury that the Lehigh & Wilkes-Barre Coal Company would be liable finally for the damages was prejudicial to the defendant. The…
2Cited by23 opinions
- Lenahan v. Pittston Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Narciso v. Mauch Chunk TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
- Hollis v. United States Glass Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Trimble v. MerloeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
- Kaplan v. LoevSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.