Barton v. Craighill
112 A. 96, 268 Pa. 464, 1920 Pa. LEXIS 718
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedDecember 31, 1920
DocketAppeal, No. 178
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases
This text of 112 A. 96 (Barton v. Craighill) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Barton v. Craighill, 112 A. 96, 268 Pa. 464, 1920 Pa. LEXIS 718 (Pa. 1920).
Opinion
This judgment is affirmed on the opinion of the learned president judge of the court below granting defendant’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Seader v. Philadelphia
54 A.2d 701 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1946)
Miller v. Utah Light & Traction Co.
86 P.2d 37 (Utah Supreme Court, 1939)
Osby v. Tarlton
85 S.W.2d 27 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1935)
Dorris v. Bridgman & Co.
145 A. 827 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1928)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
112 A. 96, 268 Pa. 464, 1920 Pa. LEXIS 718, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barton-v-craighill-pa-1920.