Curry v. Atlantic Refining Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 170, Jan. T., 1912, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 4, Philadelphia Co., Dec. T., 1909, No. 1878, on verdict for plaintiff in case of William H. Curry v. Atlantic Refining Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Audenried, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 170, Jan. T., 1912, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 4, Philadelphia Co., Dec. T., 1909, No. 1878, on verdict for plaintiff in case of William H. Curry v. Atlantic Refining Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Audenried, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for $3,500.00. Defendant subsequently made a motion for judgment n. o. v. and for a new trial, which motions were overruled and judgment entered on the verdict. Defendant appealed. Error assigned was, inter alia,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Potter,
Counsel for appellant contend that the questions involved in this case should not have been submitted to the jury. They urge that the trial judge erred in refusing to direct a verdict for the defendant, and in declining to enter judgment for defendant non obstante veredicto. It is argued that the plaintiff did not show how the accident happened. It does, however, appear clearly from the evidence that the plaintiff had been employed by the defendant company for about three months prior to the date of the accident which occcurred on June 24, 1908. That on the night…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Vetter v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Jerdon v. SirulnikSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
- Riley v. Kendrick Warehouse & Milling Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1918
- James v. SnellenburgSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Jerdon v. SirulnikSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.