Legal Opinion

Krell v. Jacobson

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 27, 1934No. Appeal, 192PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Simpson,

Defendants appeal from the judgment entered on a vei'dict for plaintiff, in an action of trespass for negligence. Notwithstanding our recognition of the skill and care which the trial judge displayed during the trial of the case, we are constrained to enter judgment for defendants non obstante veredicto.

Defendants are engaged in the business of slaughtering cattle, calves, sheep and lambs, and of selling the slaughtered animals to others who dispose of the meat at retail. Plaintiff was, and for a number of years had been, one of their customers, visiting their…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Young v. HippleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
  2. Dunmore v. PaddenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
  3. Felski v. ZeidmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  4. Morningstar v. North East Pennsylvania R. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  5. Krewson v. SawyerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Kline v. KachmarSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  2. First National Bank of Blairstown v. GoldbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  3. Rogan EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  4. Zisman Exr. v. Duquesne CitySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  5. Hollander v. KressmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940

2 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