Legal Opinion · Dissent

Smith v. Pachter

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 30, 1941No. Appeals, 97-100Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Drew:

I am constrained to dissent from the opinion of the majority in these appeals, for .1 have searched the record in its entirety in vain for the slightest evidence of. negligence on. the part of defendant. A. careful scrutiny of the testimony adduced reveals that the sole cause of this unfortunate accident, was the negligence of these two young ladies, .who at.the time they sustained their injuries were of the ages, of sixteen years and-three months, and fourteen years and eleven months, respectively. Both of them -had sufficient • capacity and…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Leslie v. CatanzaroSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  2. Rhoads v. HerbertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  3. Post v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  4. Justice v. WeymannSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  5. Idell v. DaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922

11 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