Legal Opinion
Logan v. Stelmach
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided March 9, 1984No. 630PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LIPEZ, Judge:
Plaintiff in this negligence action obtained a judgment for $22,500. Plaintiff has taken this appeal, requesting a new trial on damages only on the grounds that: (1) the verdict was inadequate; (2) the amount of the verdict was against the weight of the evidence; and (3) the court below erred by instructing the jury not to consider income tax consequences in their verdict. Because we agree with plaintiffs third contention, we vacate the judgment and grant a new trial on damages only, and there is no need to consider the first two issues.
Defendant’s only point for charge was…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Gradel v. InouyeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Commonwealth v. DavenportSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Girard Trust Corn Exchange Bank v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Gradel v. InouyeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
3Cited by6 opinions
- Eisenberg v. GagnonCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- Fairbanks v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Martin Eisenberg and Arthur Nissen, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Frederick M. Gagnon, Bernard A. Boyers, David E. Wasserstrom, Charles Lieberman, Edward Hershenhorn, David Weinstein, John W. Pelino, Morris L. Chucas, Tom P. Monteverde, Wasserstrom & Chucas, and Pelino, Wasserstrom, Chucas & Monteverde, P.C. v. Gelrod, Fox and Co., Clarence Rainess & Co., Seidman and Seidman, Gruntal and Co., Marvin Welsch and Jack Panich. Appeal of Martin Eisenberg and Arthur Nissen, in Nos. 84-1214 & 84-1225. Appeal of David E. Wasserstrom, in No. 84-1261Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- Logan v. StelmachSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Wood v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.