Legal Opinion

Steingart v. Kaney

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 4, 1941No. Appeal, 13PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Baldrige, J.,

The plaintiff brought this action in trespass to recover damages to his truck and for personal injuries as the result of an automobile collision. The trial resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of $507.50. The defendant filed motions for a new trial and for judgment n. o. v. The learned court below granted a new trial on the ground that the charge to the jury was inadequate under our rulings in Hess et al. v. Mumma et al., 136 Pa. Superior Ct. 58, 7 A. 2d 72. The question now before us is: Did the trial judge err in refusing to affirm defendant’s request…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Adams v. GardinerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  2. Rhinehart v. JordanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  3. Hess v. MummaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  4. Spear and Company v. AltmyerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  5. Clee v. Brinks, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Schall v. Penn Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  2. Glennon v. OstroffSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. Reiter v. AndrewsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1944
  4. United States v. GoldmanDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1945
  5. Mancini v. Giant Food Stores Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Montgomery County2010

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

Powered by the Exa API