Lischko v. Potteiger & Hainley, Inc.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 236, Jan. T., 1917, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. .2, Philadelphia Co., March T., 1916, No. 1049, on verdict for plaintiff, in case of Eva Lischko v. Potteiger & Hainley, Incorporated. Trespass to recover damages for the death of plaintiff’s husband. Before Barratt, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. Yerdict for plaintiff for $6,615 and judgment thereon. Defendant appealed. Errors assigned were instructions to the jury.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 236, Jan. T., 1917, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. .2, Philadelphia Co., March T., 1916, No. 1049, on verdict for plaintiff, in case of Eva Lischko v. Potteiger & Hainley, Incorporated. Trespass to recover damages for the death of plaintiff’s husband. Before Barratt, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. Yerdict for plaintiff for $6,615 and judgment thereon. Defendant appealed. Errors assigned were instructions to the jury. There was no evidence of defendant’s negligence: Bossi v. Burke Electric Co., 20 Dist. R. 1121; Garrison v. Armstrong & Co., 248…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Moschzisker,
Plaintiff sued in trespass to recover for loss resulting from the death of her husband, which she alleges was due to the negligence of the defendant corporation; judgment was entered on a verdict in her favor, and this appeal ensued.
The following excerpts from the charge of the trial judge sufficiently explain the facts essential to an understanding of the case: “At about nine o’clock in the morning of September-22, 1915, the husband of plaintiff met with an accident, which caused his death within a few hours.....He was employed by the defendants..... as a…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Williams v. LewineSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1923