Legal Opinion

Thomas v. DeSabato

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 17, 1951No. Appeal, 101PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

Plaintiffs have appealed from an order of the court below granting a new trial after a verdict in their favor. We will not reverse such an order unless there is a clear error of law or a palpable abuse of discretion. Martin v. Arnold, 366 Pa. 128, 131, 77 A. 2d 99; Frank v. Bayuk, 322 Pa. 282, 185 A. 705; Class & Nachod Brewing Co. v. Giacobello, 277 Pa. 530, 121 A. 333.

The action arose ont of a collision between an automobile, driven by plaintiff Stephen Massaro, and a truck owned by defendant Amedeo De Sabato and driven by his minor son and servant, the other defendant, Sylvio De…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Class & Nachod Brewing Co. v. GiacobelloSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  2. MARTIN v. ArnoldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
  3. Bergen v. Lit Bros.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
  4. Frank, Admr. v. BayukSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  5. Hamilton v. MooreSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Board of Trustees Eloy Elemen. Sch. Dist. v. McEwenCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1967
  2. Cohen AppealSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  3. Litt v. Rolling Hill HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  4. Zitomer v. HoldsworthDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1961
  5. Commonwealth v. StradaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1952

2 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