Cain v. Kohlman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Linn,
Defendant appeals from judgment on a verdict for plaintiff in an action for personal injury. Plaintiff was struck by defendant’s truck while he was walking around or standing alongside his car which he had just parked.
Appellant states two general propositions as reasons for a new trial. (1) “The charge of the court was erroneous, confusing and went beyond the bounds of propriety.” (2) “The judge erred in examining a witness in such a manner as was calculated to bring out defendant’s insurance.”
The argument in support of the first proposition is presented under four…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Trusty Et Ux. v. PattersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Amey v. ErbSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- McCaulif v. GriffithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Ott v. Oyer'sSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
- Duffy v. GriffithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Pushnik v. Winky's Drive in Restaurants, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
- Knapp v. Willys-Ardmore, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
- Phillips v. SchoenbergerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Bizich v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Thomas v. MillsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.