Clark v. Millett
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 30, Oct. T., 1913, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., June T., 1910, No. 4,782, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of Susan Clark v. A. B. Millett and C. F. Millett. Trespass -to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Davis, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Error assigned was order refusing to take off nonsuit.'
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case the learned trial judge entered a compulsory non-suit which he after-wards refused to take off. This action constitutes the error assigned.
As the record is presented to us, we do not think the action of the learned judge below can be justified on the ground that the act of negligence on the part of the defendants, if any, established by the testimony, was not precisely that set forth in the declaration. No objection was made to the admission of the evidence as we have it on the ground that it was not in harmony with the pleadings.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Carr v. General Fire Extinguisher Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Lamb v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
3Cited by8 opinions
- Kehres v. StuempfleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Ponti v. PhiladelphiaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Irwin v. Leuten Brick Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Lederman v. LazarusSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Gibson v. Stainless Steel Sales Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.