MacDonald v. Gimbel Brothers, Inc.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Schaffer,
This action was brought by plaintiff to recover damages for injuries which she claims were sustained when she fell on the floor of defendant’s store. The trial judge entered a compulsory nonsuit, which the court in banc declined to remove. From this action plaintiff appeals.
On what she testified was a bright, clear, sunshiny afternoon in August, plaintiff was walking on the second floor of defendant’s store. She had entered the establishment to make a purchase. The store, including the floor, was well lighted and she had a clear view along the aisle in which she…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Spickernagle v. WoolworthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Gorman v. Simon Brahm's Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Ziegler v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Bell v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- McCann v. GordonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Moultrey v. Great a & P Tea Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Boucher v. Paramount-Richards TheatresLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1947
- Smith Et Ux. v. Amer. Stores Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
- Declerico (Et Ux.) v. Gimbel Bros., Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- Reay, Adr. v. Montg.-Ward Co., Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.