Legal Opinion

Schilling v. Pittsburgh Engineering, Foundry & Construction Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 22, 1934No. Appeal, 60PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

Defendant appeals from refusal of judgment non obstante veredicto in an action of trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. The jury’s verdict for plaintiff in the amount of $16,000 was subsequently reduced to $10,000 by the trial judge, and judgment entered thereon. Considering the testimony in the light most favorable to plaintiff (Duane v. P. R. R. Co., 310 Pa. 334), the salient facts concerning the accident are as follows:

Plaintiff was a truck driver employed by the Hagen Transportation Company, which concern had entered into an oral contract with defendant to haul…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. McKnight v. S. S. Kresge Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  2. Grogan v. J. H. Hinkle & Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
  3. Duane v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Meyer v. HarveySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1943

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API