Legal Opinion

Defulvio v. Holst

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 27, 1979No. 2394PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOFFMAN, Judge:

Appellant contends that the lower court erred in (1) denying her motion for judgment N.O.V. or for a new trial on the issue of informed consent; (2) permitting the jury to consider as an element of damages appellee’s loss of earnings; (3) denying her motion for a new trial based upon the excessiveness of the verdict. We reject appellant’s contentions and, accordingly, affirm the order of the court below.

In late 1967, appellee, William DeFulvio, consulted Dr. Richard Oakey, a plastic surgeon, concerning feelings of “stuffiness” in his right ear and “fullness” in the right side…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Gray v. GrunnagleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  2. Cooper v. RobertsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1971
  3. Kemp v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  4. Bell v. Yellow Cab Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
  5. Ashcraft v. C. G. Hussey and Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1948

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Martin v. SoblotneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Neal by Neal v. LuSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  3. Tyus v. RestaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  4. Festa v. GreenbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  5. Boyer v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985

13 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