Coughlin, A. v. Massaquoi, U.

144 A.3d 925, 636 Pa. 464, 2016 Pa. LEXIS 1877, 2016 WL 4467279
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided August 24, 2016·No. 166 EAL 2016 (Granted)·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

*465 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 24th day of August, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is:

In a civil trial brought on behalf of a pedestrian who was killed by a motorist, is it reversible error where the defendant motorist admits evidence of the pedestrian’s uncorroborated post-mortem blood alcohol content (BAC) by way of a toxicology expert who merely explains the uncorroborated BAC in terms of how an equivalent BAC would render an “average” person unfit to cross the street?

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

Coughlin, A. v. Massaquoi, U., 144 A.3d 925, 636 Pa. 464, 2016 Pa. LEXIS 1877, 2016 WL 4467279 (Pa. 2016).

144 A.3d 925 (Coughlin, A. v. Massaquoi, U.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Coughlin, A., Aplt. v. Massaquoi, U.
170 A.3d 399 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2017)