Legal Opinion

Nehrebecki v. Mull

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 12, 1963No. Appeal, 123PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Me. Justice Eagen,

This is a personal injury and property damage action arising out of an automobile collision. The jury specifically found that the defendant was not guilty of negligence and returned a verdict in his favor. The court en banc below granted a new trial ruling that the verdict was “capricious and against the weight of the evidence and resulted in a miscarriage of justice.” The defendant appeals.

We have repeatedly said that we will not reverse the grant of a new trial, unless there was a clear abuse of discretion, or an error of law which controlled the outcome of the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Evans v. Otis Elevator Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  2. Jones Et Vir v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  3. Bohner v. Eastern Express, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  4. Segriff v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
  5. Ratcliff v. MyersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Thompson v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  2. Spang & Co. v. United States Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Stevenson v. General Motors Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Armbruster v. HorowitzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  5. Westinghouse Elevator Co. v. HerronSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987

8 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