Legal Opinion · Dissent

Florence Rumsey v. The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, Inc

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided March 5, 1969No. 17103Published

1DissentMcLAUGHLIN, Circuit Judge

(dissenting) .

As this appeal now stands, concededly Pennsylvania law governs its substantive negligence problem. Also concededly Smith v. Bell Telephone Co., 397 Pa. 134, 153 A.2d 477 (1959) correctly sets out what is the Pennsylvania law for said governing problem.

Plaintiff slipped and fell in one of defendant’s stores. She instituted a negligence suit in the District Court to recover for injuries sustained. A jury verdict in the amount of $20,000 was rendered in her favor. On November 27, 1967, upon defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, in an opinion and order of the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Smith v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  2. Grunenthal v. Long Island Rail RoadSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  3. Lanni v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  4. Martino v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  5. Mack v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915

6 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