Baiz v. Atlantic Refining Co.

170 A. 268, 314 Pa. 17, 1934 Pa. LEXIS 434
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided January 2, 1934·No. Appeal, 57·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Defendant appeals from the refusal of its motion for judgment n. o. v. and new trial, after verdict for plaintiff, in an action of trespass arising from a collision between two trucks. All questions raised by appellant relate to matters of fact which were left to' the jury under proper instructions and resolved in plaintiff’s favor. As the record discloses ample testimony to support the' finding of the jury, we are concluded thereby: Remppis v. Ettelt, 310 Pa. 479; Rossheim v. Bornot, 310 Pa. 154; Adams v. Gardiner, 306 Pa. 576; Sheasley v. Haney, 311 Pa. 144.

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Baiz v. Atlantic Refining Co., 170 A. 268, 314 Pa. 17, 1934 Pa. LEXIS 434 (Pa. 1934).

170 A. 268 (Baiz v. Atlantic Refining Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brauner v. Corgan
173 A. 397 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1934)