Legal Opinion

Cox v. Roehler

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 10, 1934No. Appeals, 246 and 249PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Drew,

Plaintiffs recovered verdicts against F. C. Roehler and Mary Roehler, husband and wife, for damages resulting from his alleged negligence in operating an automobile jointly owned by defendants. From the judgments entered thereon the wife alone has appealed.

The sole question raised is whether the evidence is sufficient to show a master-servant relation between defendants — the only ground upon which the verdict against appellant could be sustained. Was the husband at the time of the accident acting as his wife’s servant? We can find nothing in the record to indicate…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Rodgers Et Ux. v. SaxtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  2. McColligan v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
  3. Kelley v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  4. Eckert v. Merchants Shipbuilding Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  5. Sulzner v. Cappeau-Lemley & Miller Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Aetna Insurance v. Kennedy Ex Rel. BogashSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  2. Joseph v. United Workers Assn.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. Waggaman v. General Finance Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1940
  4. Holt v. PariserSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  5. Watkins Et Ux. v. Overland M. F. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936

12 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