Legal Opinion

Lundin v. Heilman

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 24, 1953No. Appeal, 23PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Allen M. Stearne,

This trespass action was instituted by plaintiffs, husband and wife, to recover damages for injuries sustained by the wife while riding as a passenger in an automobile driven by the defendant. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant. Plaintiffs appealed contending the court below gave an erroneous *317instruction to the jury when it affirmed one of the defendant’s points for charge, viz.: “the speed of the automobile was not the proximate cause of the accident”.

The injuries occurred on the morning of December 29, 1948, at about 1:00 a.m. The…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Richardson v. PattersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  2. Simpson v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  3. Johnson v. American Reduction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  4. Master v. Goldstein's Fruit & Produce, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  5. Hatch v. RobinsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. McElhinny v. IliffSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  2. Com. v. Lowry, K.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  3. Kotal v. GoldbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  4. Kotal v. GoldbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  5. Lundin v. HeilmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API