Forney v. Cox

70 Pa. Super. 530, 1918 Pa. Super. LEXIS 297
Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided December 12, 1918·No. No. 1; Appeal, Nos. 229 and 237·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Williams, J.,

There is little in this case to differentiate it from House v. Cox, 70 Pa. Superior Ct. 531, and it is ruled in all but one point by that decision. Counsel contends that a new trial should have been granted because the physician who treated Mrs. Forney failed to read the full text of [531] her hospital record, reading, at the trial, the portion mentioning a diagnosis of fractured skull, and failing to read the portion stating that an X-ray failed to show a fracture.

The record was in court, defendant’s counsel had access to it and could have known of the omission. It is not, therefore, such after-discovered evidence as would compel the granting of a new trial: see Marine Coal Co. v. P., McK. and Y. R. R. Co., 246 Pa. 478. There is no indication that plaintiffs or counsel countenanced any concealment. The court charged that while there was some evidence of a fractured skull, “Mrs. Forney was kept quiet for three weeks and there was no evidence of any injury to the brain and she was discharged.” No abuse of discretion appears in the court’s refusal of defendant’s motion.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Forney v. Cox, 70 Pa. Super. 530, 1918 Pa. Super. LEXIS 297 (Pa. Ct. App. 1918).

70 Pa. Super. 530 (Forney v. Cox) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Marine Coal Co. v. Pittsburgh, McKeesport & Youghiogheny Railroad
92 A. 688 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1914)
House v. Cox
70 Pa. Super. 531 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1918)