Legal Opinion

Crowley v. Snellenburg

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 6, 1926No. Appeal 199PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Keller, J.,

We are compelled to sustain the fifth and seventh assignments of error, as there was no competent evidence in the case as to the value of the plaintiff ’s automobile after the accident. The court refused to permit Youtsey,- — who seems to have been the only witness in court competent to testify on that point, — to state the value of the ear when he saw it within a very short time after the accident; but let the jury infer that it was of no value at all, because the plaintiff said it was so smashed that he would not want to run it again even if repaired, and a witness,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Vogler v. Harrisburg Railways Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1925

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Rice v. HillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  2. Lieb v. MayerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  3. Richardson v. Wilkes-Barre Transit Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
  4. Sweitzer v. WhiteheadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  5. Loughery v. BarnesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956

4 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