Legal Opinion

Diffenderfer v. Staner

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 12, 1998PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FORD ELLIOTT, J.:

AppellantsfTessors of a dairy farm, bring this appeal from a judgment entered in favor of David Diffenderfer, the farm’s lessee. Because we find that the trial court erred as a matter of law when it allowed the strict liability and nuisance claims against appellants to go to the jury, we vacate the judgment and enter judgment n.o.v. as to those two counts. We also remand for a new trial as to Richard Staner on the negligence count. 1 Appellants claim trial court error in the denial of their post-verdict motions; therefore, we first set forth our proper standard and scope of…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Philadelphia Electric Company v. Hercules, Inc. And Gould, Inc. Appeal of Hercules, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
  2. Simmons v. Pacor, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  3. Wenrick v. Schloemann-Siemag AktiengesellschaftSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  4. Spang & Co. v. United States Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  5. Stewart v. MottsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Gould Electronics Inc., F/k/a Gould Inc. American Premier Underwriters, Inc. v. United States of America Gould Electronics Inc. American Premier Underwriters, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
  2. Gould Electronics Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
  3. Banks v. Ashland Oil Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2001
  4. Ely v. Cabot Oil & Gas Corp.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
  5. Tiongco v. Southwestern Energy Production Co.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2016

7 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