Legal Opinion

Serlich v. Stern

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 14, 1922No. Appeal, No. 4Published

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Henderson, J.,

The complaint set forth in the first and second assignments of error is that the court erred in refusing to give binding instructions for the defendant. The points are predicated of the fact that the defendant consulted his attorney and acted on his advice with respect to the bringing of the prosecution. The requests for instructions could not have been affirmed, however, in the form in which they are presented for the reason that they exclude consideration of the question whether a full and candid disclosure of all of the facts within the knowledge of the prosecutor…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Philad. Traction Co. v. OrbannSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
  2. Nagle v. MullisonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1859
  3. Tyler v. Philadelphia Ritz-Carlton Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1920

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API