Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Crummer v. Berkman

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 18, 1985No. 00446Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partOlszewski, Judge

I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion to remand for a new trial on the merits of this case. In my view, appellant has failed to show the elements of fraudulent inducement to enter into an agreement of sale necessary to allow the issue to progress to jury determination.

A directed verdict may be granted on the whole record only if the evidence, viewed in a light most advantageous to the non-moving party, and resolving all conflicts in her favor, and giving her the benefit of every fact and inference pertaining to the issues involved which may be reasonably deduced therefrom,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. College Watercolor Group, Inc. v. William H. Newbauer, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  2. National Building Leasing, Inc. v. BylerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Feld v. MerriamSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  4. Bachman v. ArtingerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. Hogan v. Bryn Mawr HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977

4 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