Legal Opinion

Hess v. Mumma

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 16, 1939No. Appeal, 18PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Rhodes, J.,

This is an appeal by defendants in an action of trespass, which arose out of a collision between an automobile OAvned and operated by minor plaintiff, hereinafter termed plaintiff, and a truck operated by Martin R. Mumma, one of the defendants. The jury rendered a verdict for plaintiff. Defendants’ motion for new trial was refused, and from the judgment entered on the verdict defendants have appealed. Their only complaint is to the charge of the court, and this is before us on a general exception.

At the trial it was plaintiff’s contention that he had the right of Avay…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Alperdt Et Ux. v. PaigeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  2. Henes v. McGovernSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
  3. De Reeder v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  4. Sears v. BirbeckSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  5. Patterson v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BloseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
  2. DeAngelis v. BurnsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  3. Com. of Pa., Dept. of Hwys. v. EldridgeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
  4. Hamilton v. FeanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  5. McEwan v. Yellow Cab CompanySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956

16 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