Seiss v. McClintic-marshall Corp.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Schaffer,
This is an action upon an alleged contract of employment. The jury found a verdict in plaintiff’s favor for $7,486.82. The court below, the trial judge dissenting, entered judgment for defendant non obstante veredicto. From this action plaintiff appeals.
Prior to February, 1915, plaintiff was employed by defendant as a fitter. His wages were forty-four cents an hour. In the month mentioned, he was injured while at work in defendant’s plant and was required to spend several weeks in a hospital. He alleged that, in consideration of his refraining from bringing suit…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Heaman v. E. N. Rowell Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1933
- Edgcomb v. CloughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- MacHen v. Budd Wheel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- McNeely v. BookmyerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Ogden v. Philadelphia & West Chester Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Harry C. Murray v. Commercial Union Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1986
- Slonaker v. P. G. Publishing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Browne v. MaxfieldDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1987
- Bernard J. Lee, Platiff-Appellant v. Jenkins Brothers, Bernard J. Lee v. Farnham YardleyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1959
- Kirk v. Brentwood Manor Homes, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.