Legal Opinion

Glass v. Freeman

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 24, 1968No. Appeals, 432 and 472PublishedCited by 71 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mb. Justice Eagen,

Dallas E. Glass instituted this action to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly caused by the negligence of the defendants, Clarence and Marie Freeman, Donald Bauman and R. A. Reinhold. At trial a compulsory nonsuit Avas entered in favor of the defendant Reinhold.1 As to the other defendants, the issue was submitted to the jury and a verdict resulted in favor of Glass in the amount of $17,894.83 against both the Freemans and Bauman. Glass filed a motion for a new trial, asserting that the verdict was inadequate. The Freemans filed a motion for judgment…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Kuhns v. BruggerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
  2. Anderson v. Bushong Pontiac Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  3. Connolly v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  4. James v. FergusonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
  5. Liney v. Chestnut Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966

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

3Cited by71 opinions

  1. Dambacher by Dambacher v. MallisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  2. Tonkovic v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  3. Norman I. Suchomajcz, Administrator of the Estate of Norman Suchomajcz, a Minor v. Hummel Chemical Company, Newark, New JerseyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1975
  4. Benson v. Penn Central Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  5. Commonwealth v. ChastenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1971

66 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