Legal Opinion

Marach v. Kooistra

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 10, 1938No. Appeal, 12PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Schaefer,

There is but one proposition open in this action of trespass, brought by plaintiff to recover damages from defendants, who are partners, for injuries received by her when she was struck by a truck, admittedly used generally by defendants in their business, although registered in the name of but one of them, and that is, whether the operator of the truck was engaged in their business at the time he inflicted the serious injuries on plaintiff.

Negligent operation of the truck is not denied. It is claimed, however, by defendants that it was lent to the operator, on…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Hartig v. American Ice Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  2. Holzheimer v. Lit Bros.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
  3. Thatcher v. PierceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  4. Readshaw Et Ux. v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  5. Sieber v. Russ Bros. Ice Cream Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Kline v. KachmarSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  2. Waters v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  3. Ealy v. New York Central RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  4. Dugan v. McGara's Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  5. Zisman Exr. v. Duquesne CitySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1940

14 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