Legal Opinion

Lesick v. Proctor.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 26, 1930No. Appeal, 89PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Me. Justice Walling,

Plaintiffs brought this suit for injuries which the wife plaintiff, Tessy Lesick, avers she sustained while a' customer at defendant’s hair shop in Pittsburgh. The trial judge granted a compulsory nonsuit and a denial of the motion to take it off forms the basis of this appeal by plaintiffs.

In our opinion the order appealed from was error. Plaintiffs’ evidence tended to prove that on November 4, 1927, Mrs. Lesick, while receiving a permanent wave in defendant’s shop, suffered serious electric burns. The work was being done by an attendant in defendant’s employ,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Fitzpatrick v. PenfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
  2. Zahniser v. Pennsylvania Torpedo Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
  3. Murray v. FrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  4. Dougherty v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
  5. Dei v. StratigosSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Railroad v. PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  2. Knox v. SimmermanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
  3. MacK v. Reading CompanySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  4. Maltz v. CarterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  5. Lebeck v. William A. Jarvis, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1956

13 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