Legal Opinion

Zeman v. Canonsburg Borough

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 15, 1966No. Appeals, 236 and 237PublishedCited by 48 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Bell,

This was an action of trespass brought by a father in behalf of his minor son, of whom he was natural guardian, and in his own right. Plaintiffs claimed that the boy, who was then 11 years old, suffered injuries to his forehead when he was pushed into a swimming pool owned and operated by the defendant-appellee, the Borough of Canonsburg, in a proprietary capacity. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant, and plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial was dismissed by the Court en banc. Plaintiffs appeal from the judgment which was entered on the verdict.

On June…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Flagiello v. CrillySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  2. Enfield v. StoutSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
  3. Commonwealth v. RazmusSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
  4. McDonald v. FerrebeeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  5. Segriff v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960

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

3Cited by48 opinions

  1. Hamil v. BashlineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  2. Commonwealth v. McKennaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  3. Hionis v. Northern Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  4. Goodheart v. CaseySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  5. Boyle v. SteimanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993

43 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