Legal Opinion

Hartman v. Donahue

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 17, 1940No. Appeal, 264PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Parker, J.,

Opinion by

The sole question raised in tbis appeal is whether a service upon an additional defendant was valid. We all agree with the conclusion of the learned court below that it was not. The original defendant brings this appeal.

An automobile in which the plaintiffs were riding was being operated by John Jones, Jr., in Delaware County, when there wás ¿ collision with a motor vehicle owned and driven by James I. Donahue, the original defendant, resulting in injuries to the plaintiffs. Suit was brought in Philadelphia County against Donahue, who, when served with a statement of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Williams Et Ux. v. MeredithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
  2. Heaney v. Mauch Chunk Boro. (Et Al.)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  3. Gossard v. GossardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  4. Nathan v. McGinleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Koll v. PickfordSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  2. Vaughan v. WOMELDORFSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
  3. Hooks v. DuBoisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  4. Maiers v. MeyrSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
  5. Arcady Farms Milling Co. v. Rose, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Indiana County1948

6 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