Legal Opinion

Friedman v. Ralph Brothers, Inc.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 30, 1934No. Appeal, 129PublishedCited by 59 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion bx

Me. Justice Kephart,

Plaintiff requested a new trial in the court below because of the improper conduct of the foreman of the jury in personally visiting the place where the accident occurred, the liability for which was then before the jury, and communicating knowledge learned while at the place of the accident to other members of the jury. The foreman denied some of the charges, and the jurors were not in accord as to what the foreman had related.

We cannot condemn too severely the act of a juror personally viewing the place of an accident or any matter subject to judicial…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Eastley v. GlennSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  2. Commonwealth v. FilerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
  3. Commonwealth v. BergdollSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1913

3Cited by59 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. KravitzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
  2. Maize v. Atlantic Refining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
  3. Commonwealth v. PatrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  4. Commonwealth v. SeroSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  5. Carter v. United States Steel Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

54 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