Weida v. Hanover Township
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 45, Jan. T., 1906, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., Oct. T., 1903, No. 1,071, on verdict for plaintiff in case of William Weida v. Hanover Township. Trespass to recover damages for death of a child two and one-half years old. Before Lynch, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $1,033.50. Defendant appealed. Error assigned was in refusing binding instructions for defendant.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
By its seventh point the defendant asked the court below to instruct the jury that “ under all the evidence the plaintiff cannot recover and the verdict should be for the defendant.” The refusal of this point is the sole error assigned. We have nothing in the record before us requiring us to examine the correctness of any ruling made during the trial on the admission or rejection of evidence or the soundness of the instructions, on the legal principles involved, contained in the charge to the jury. We have simply and practically a demurrer to the whole of the evidence.
Appell…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Kay v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
- Commonwealth v. MooreheadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
- Commonwealth v. ShoemakerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
- Johnson v. Reading City Passenger RailwaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- In re Opening of Pearl StreetSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Easton v. KochSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
- Hawkes v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
- Hileman v. Hollidaysburg BoroughSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Wensel v. North Versailles TownshipSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- McDermott v. Consolidated Ice Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.