Connor v. Hawk
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Arnold,
Plaintiffs appeal from the order of the court below refusing their motion for removal of compulsory monsuit in this action of trespass for damages sustained in the destruction of their drugstore building and contents by fire.. Viewing the testimony, as we must in such cases, in. a light most favorable to plaintiffs, the following appears: By contract with plaintiffs Philadelphia Wholesale Drug Company, defendant, decorated plaintiffs’ store windows at fixed intervals. On the day in question, their employe, Hawk, individual defendant, *482proceeded to decorate one of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Dannals v. Sylvania TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Commonwealth v. RogozinskiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Satovich v. LeeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Propert v. FlanaganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Sharble v. Kuehnle-Wilson, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
3Cited by16 opinions
- Smith v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
- Flagiello v. CrillySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Lear v. Shirk's Motor Express Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
- Lanza v. PorettiDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1982
- Rutovitsky v. MaglioccoSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.