Colville v. CROWN EQUIPMENT CORPORATION

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Colville v. CROWN EQUIPMENT CORPORATION

791 A.2d 1168, 568 Pa. 61, 2002 Pa. LEXIS 493

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMarch 20, 2002

DocketAppeal 546 EAL 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 791 A.2d 1168 (Colville v. CROWN EQUIPMENT CORPORATION) 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

Colville v. CROWN EQUIPMENT CORPORATION, 791 A.2d 1168, 568 Pa. 61, 2002 Pa. LEXIS 493 (Pa. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

*62 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 20th day of March, 2002, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The Superior Court erred in holding that petitioners’ request for a jury instruction on crashworthiness was waived. See Pa. R. C.P. 227(b) (“[a]ll exceptions to charge to jury shall be taken before jury retires.”); compare McNeil v. Owens-Coming Fiberglas Corp., 545 Pa. 209, 680 A.2d 1145, 1148-49 (1996) (issue of whether trial court failed to instruct jury in accordance with proposed points for charge waived where party failed to lodge specific objection to charge). See also Pa. R.A.P. 302(b). Accordingly, the order and judgment of the Superior Court is VACATED and the matter is REMANDED to the Superior Court for consideration of the merits of petitioners’ claim that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the crashworthiness doctrine.

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

*62 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 20th day of March, 2002, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The Superior Court erred in holding that petitioners’ request for a jury instruction on crashworthiness was waived. See Pa. R. C.P. 227(b) (“[a]ll exceptions to charge to jury shall be taken before jury retires.”); compare McNeil v. Owens-Coming Fiberglas Corp., 545 Pa. 209, 680 A.2d 1145, 1148-49 (1996) (issue of whether trial court failed to instruct jury in accordance with proposed points for charge waived where party failed to lodge specific objection to charge). See also Pa. R.A.P. 302(b). Accordingly, the order and judgment of the Superior Court is VACATED and the matter is REMANDED to the Superior Court for consideration of the merits of petitioners’ claim that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the crashworthiness doctrine.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

791 A.2d 1168, 568 Pa. 61, 2002 Pa. LEXIS 493, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colville-v-crown-equipment-corporation-pa-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack