Ivins v. Jacob
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
At Law. Action by Mary J. Ivins against Joseph P. Jacob and another, trading as Jacob Bros. On motion of defendants for a new trial.
1Opinion of the Court
DICKINSON, District Judge.
The questions remaining in this case relate to the correctness of the instructions given to the jury and to the result of the jury’s admeasurement of the damages. Excluding the latter, there are eight reasons assigned to support _ the motion. The first three and the eighth may be characterized as formal.
[1, 2] The fourth bears upon the application of the “res ipsa loquitur” rule to the general facts of this case. The quoted phrase has two meanings. It is used to voice the rule of law that the mere fact of damage justifies the conclusion of legal injury through and by…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Zahniser v. Pennsylvania Torpedo Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- Wolf v. . American Tract SocietyNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Lucid v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours Powder Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1912
- Joyce v. BlackSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Allen v. Kingston Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
3Cited by7 opinions
- Lachman v. Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1947
- Nicol v. GeitlerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1933
- Sawyer v. People's Freight Lines, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 1933
- White v. PinneyUtah Supreme Court · 1940
- Jacob v. IvinsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1918
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.