Legal Opinion

Weinfeld v. Funk

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 24, 1941No. Appeal, 135PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

This is an appeal from an order granting a new trial. In its opinion, the court states: “After a careful review of the entire case, we reached the firm conclusion that justice demanded that plaintiff’s motion for a new trial be sustained.” We have uniformly held that under such circumstances we will not review the action of the court below: Reese v. Pittsburgh Rys. Co., 336 Pa. 299, 9 A. 2d 394; Kerr v. Hofer, 341 Pa. 47, 17 A. 2d 886.

The order of the court below is affirmed.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Reese v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  2. Kerr Et Ux. v. Hofer (Et Al.)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Bellettiere v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  2. Commonwealth v. PowellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  3. Commonwealth v. DolanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  4. Gerber v. Jones (Et Al.)Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  5. German, Adr. v. RiddellSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942

9 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