Westerman. v. Stout
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by
Cercone, J.:
I agree with the majority’s opinion in all respects, except insofar as it supports the jury’s finding that Mrs. Stout acted negligently in responding to a sudden emergency not of her creation. Despite a cogent and well-written opinion by Judge Bodley in the court below, I agree with Mrs. Stout’s contention that she should be found not negligent as a matter of law. I would, therefore, reverse and remand for a trial limited solely to the question of the damages suffered by Mrs. Stout in the instant case.
The scope of our inquiry into jury verdicts…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Heffernan v. RosserSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
- Tuite v. UNION PACIFIC STAGESOregon Supreme Court · 1955
- Lithgow v. LithgowSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Coleman v. ByrnesCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1950
- Master v. Goldstein's Fruit & Produce, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.