Gray v. H.C. Duke & Sons, Inc.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
HOFFMAN, Judge:
These consolidated appeals are from the judgment entered below in an action for contribution. At appeal No. 2945 Phi 88, H.C. Duke & Sons, Inc. (Duke) contends that the trial court erred in denying its motion for judgment n.o.v. and a new trial on the grounds that the court (1) incorrectly submitted to the jury the question of apportionment of compensatory and punitive damages; (2) allowed a defendant’s expert to testify as to the cause of the accident; and (3) refused to give a binding instruction that defendant Mast Development Company was negligent. At appeal No. 2946 Phi…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Chambers v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Kirkbride v. Lisbon Contractors, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Geyer v. SteinbronnSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Tyus v. RestaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Berman v. Radnor Rolls, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Harford Mutual Insurance v. MoorheadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Pirozzi v. Penske Olds-Cadillac-GMC, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Cohen v. Albert Einstein Medical CenterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Ludmer v. NernbergSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Montgomery v. South Philadelphia Medical Group, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.