Williams v. Metropolitan Edison Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 256, Jan. T., 1920, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Berks Co., Dec. T., 1917, No. 41, entering judgment for defendant n. o. v. in case of Erma G. Williams and William E. Sturges and Thomas W. Sturges, trading and doing business as William E. Sturges & Son, v. Metropolitan Edison Co. Trespass for death of plaintiff’s husband. Before Endlich, P. J. After the suit was started, Wm.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 256, Jan. T., 1920, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Berks Co., Dec. T., 1917, No. 41, entering judgment for defendant n. o. v. in case of Erma G. Williams and William E. Sturges and Thomas W. Sturges, trading and doing business as William E. Sturges & Son, v. Metropolitan Edison Co. Trespass for death of plaintiff’s husband. Before Endlich, P. J. After the suit was started, Wm. E. Sturges & Son, the deceased’s employers, were permitted to intervene as parties plaintiff. The jury returned a verdict for Wm. E. Sturges & Son for $1,030 and for Erma K. Williams for $5,000.…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The judgment in this case is affirmed on tbe opinion of tbe learned president judge of tbe court below making absolute defendant’s motion for it.
2Cited by12 opinions
- McFadden v. Pennzoil CompanySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Marlowe v. Travelers Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Kelly v. Director General of RailroadsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Bowser v. Citizens Light, Heat & Power Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Heber v. Puget Sound Power & Light Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1949
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.