Legal Opinion

Smith v. German

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 23, 1969No. Appeal, 74PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Roberts,

This appeal grew out of a suit by appellant and countersuit by appellee over injuries both sustained in a serious auto accident in 1962. The jury concluded that both were negligent and therefore relief was denied to both. This appeal is taken only on behalf of litigant Smith who presents several reasons why he is entitled to a new trial in the action in which he is a plaintiff. Since we conclude that one of these grounds is indeed meritorious, we vacate the judgment of the court below and remand for a new trial in Smith’s action against German.

One of the elements…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Fink v. Sheldon Axle & Spring Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Commonwealth v. NasutiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  3. Washko v. Ruckno, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  4. Tabuteau v. London Guarantee & Accident Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  5. Florig v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. Grossman v. BarkeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  2. Kravinsky v. GloverSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  3. Albert v. AlterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  4. Commonwealth v. FisherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  5. Montgomery v. Bazaz-SehgalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002

32 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