Legal Opinion

Colosimo v. Pennsylvania Electric Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 23, 1986No. 27 and 28 Western District Appeal Docket, 1986PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

HUTCHINSON, Justice.

Appellant, Pennsylvania Electric Company (Penelec), appeals by allowance an order of Superior Court sitting en banc which affirmed a McKean County Common Pleas order granting appellee’s motion for a new trial. 337 Pa.Super. 363, 486 A.2d 1378. Common Pleas granted the new trial because one of the jurors selected had previously retained counsel for additional defendant Cardamone in an independent matter and met with counsel on that matter during the trial in violation of the trial judge’s express prohibition of such contacts. We disapprove the empaneling…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Thompson v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  2. SMALICH v. WestfallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  3. Commonwealth v. PronkoskieSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Austin v. RidgeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  5. Commonwealth v. BradleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Coker v. SM Flickinger Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  2. Spang & Co. v. United States Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Kozak v. StruthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Bruckshaw v. Frankford Hospital of the PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  5. Shinal, M., et ux, Aplts. v. Toms M.D., S.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017

21 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