Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ackerman v. Delcomico

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 12, 1984No. 1499Published

1DissentMcEWEN, Judge

I agree with the conclusions of the majority, first, that the evidence of the intoxication of appellant was properly admitted and was not prejudicial and, second, that the trial court properly allowed the introduction of evidence upon the issue of the intoxication of appellant, including the blood alcohol level of appellant. I am not, however, convinced that the “presumption” of 75 P.S. § 1547(d)(3) should not be applied in a civil case. It is, nonetheless, unnecessary to analyze and address my hesitation to accept this conclusion of the majority for the reason that even if, arguendo, the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Saylor v. RoseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API