Legal Opinion

Factor v. Bicycle Technology Inc.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 26, 1998No. 26 E.D. Appeal Docket 1997PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

FLAHERTY, Chief Justice.

An expert in bicycle accident reconstruction testified, beyond the scope of his pretrial report, that he believed the front wheel of the bicycle he examined was not the wheel that was on the bicycle at the time of the accident. Plaintiffs-appellants moved to strike the expert’s testimony. The trial court denied the motion, and appellants elected not to move for a mistrial. The jury returned a verdict for defendant-appellee. The trial court denied appellants’ post-trial motion for a new trial, and the Superior Court affirmed. The issue is whether the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. McMillen v. 84 Lumber, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Allied Electrical Supply Co. v. RobertsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Kaplan v. O'KANESuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  3. Berger v. SchetmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  4. Berger v. SchetmanSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  5. Farda v. Chelsea Property Group Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County2006

3 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