Legal Opinion

Donosa v. Ueltzen

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 16, 1929No. Appeal 168PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Baldrige, J.,

The plaintiff brought this action to recover damages for breach of a contract. The case came on for trial and had proceeded to the taking of evidence upon the part of the defendant when counsel for plaintiff moved the court “to enter a voluntary nonsuit in this case with leave to take it off.”

Our statutory regulations on the subject of voluntary nonsuit are found in the Act of March 28, 1815, 6 Smith Laws 208, which reads: “Whenever, on the trial of any cause, a jury shall be ready to give in their verdict, the plaintiff shall not be called, nor shall he then be…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Beaver v. SlaneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Consolidated National Bank v. McManusSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
  3. M'Lughan v. BovardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1835
  4. Lamb v. GreenhouseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
  5. Haviland v. Fidelity Insurance, Trust & Safe Deposit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1885

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Lauterbach v. LauterbachSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
  2. Dove v. Thomas, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Green County1935
  3. O'Neil v. Stahl, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Snyder County1933
  4. Verona Tool Works v. Allegheny Forging Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API