Figlarowicz v. Somerset Electrical Co.
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
1Opinion of the Court
Crumlish, J.,
Plaintiffs have excepted to the prothonotary’s taxation of the bill of costs and have filed a petition and rule to show cause why defendant’s bill should not be stricken off. The costs in question were for an appeal taken by de*61fendant to the Supreme Court where “The only question raised on . . . appeal (was) the amount of the verdict.” Quoting from the opinion of the court: “Somerset Electrical Company, the present appellant, concedes its liability, but claims that the amount of the verdict... is grossly excessive.” Appellant was successful in . the Supreme Court in that the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Shapiro v. MalarkeySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- McCullough's Estate (No. 2)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Matthews v. Tyrone Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Henning v. KeiperSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Knoller v. Everett Realty Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dornon v. McCarthySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1965