Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. Randal

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 24, 1927No. Appeal, 141PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr.- Chief Justice Moscitzisker,

Plaintiff sued in trespass to recover for personal injuries due to an alleged assault and battery committed on him by defendant; judgment was entered for plaintiff and defendant has appealed.

The opinion of the court below, entering the judgment appealed from, explains that, “In delivering the •yevdict, the foreman, of the jury stated, $1,0.00. [thereof] was compensatory damages and $5,000 was punitive damages.” It is the rule in Pennsylvania that an award of exemplary damages must bear a reasonable proportion to the award of actual damages. In Rider…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Mobile & Montgomery Rail Road v. AshcraftSupreme Court of Alabama · 1872
  2. Louisville & Nashville R. R. v. RothCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1908
  3. Pendleton v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Hess v. MarinariWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1918
  5. Rider v. York Haven Water & Power Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Delahanty v. First Pennsylvania Bank, N.A.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  2. Hughes v. BabcockSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  3. International Electronics Co. v. N. S. T. Metal Products Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  4. Thompson v. SwankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  5. Daley v. John Wanamaker, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

23 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