Legal Opinion

Stein v. Meyer

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided April 18, 1957No. Civ. A. 19552PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAN DUSEN, District Judge.

This action for personal injuries, based on diversity of citizenship, is before the court for consideration of defendants’ contention that they are entitled to a new trial after a verdict for plaintiff in the amount of $10,000.

The trial judge is of the opinion that defendants are entitled to a new trial because of the following remarks made to the jury by counsel for plaintiff in his closing speech, so that consideration of the other grounds stated in the motion for new trial are not necessary:

“How much would you pay for a neurosis ? How much would you pay to be…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  3. Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  4. McCoy v. SilerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1953
  5. Smith v. Philadelphia Transp. Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1949

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Botta v. BrunnerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1958
  2. Palmisano v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1958
  3. Mitchell v. American Tobacco Co.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1961
  4. A v. BDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1969
  5. Johnson v. StovekenNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1958

4 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