Wilhelm v. Uttenweiler
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 120, Oct. T., 1920, by defendant, from judgment of O. P. Allegheny Co., April T., 1916, No. 1495, on verdict for plaintiff, in case of Joseph H. Wilhelm v. Frank TJttemveiler. Trespass for conversion of goods alleged to have been stolen. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appealed. Errors assigned were various rulings and instructions, appearing in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Me. Justice Frazee,
Defendant appeals from a judgment in favor of plaintiff in an action of trespass to recover the value of brass and copper parts of the equipment of plaintiff’s brewery, alleged to have been stolen by a third person and purchased by defendant, a junk dealer, with knowledge they were stolen.
The first assignment of error is to the refusal of the trial judge to withdraw a juror and continue the case because of improper remarks made by counsel for plaintiff in his address to the jury. The language complained of was, “you all know that there is more thieving in the junk…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hoffman v. Berwind-White Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Llewellyn v. Wilkes-BarreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Cook v. Erie Electric Motor Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Mish v. WoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1859
- Stocker v. SchneiderSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Narciso v. Mauch Chunk TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
- L.B. Foster Co. v. Charles Caracciolo Steel & Metal Yard, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
- Davis v. Southern Surety Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Mittleman v. BartikowskySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Martin v. Philadelphia Suburban Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.