Gross v. Lockwood Folding Box Corp.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Gross v. Lockwood Folding Box Corp.

277 A.2d 359, 443 Pa. 159, 1971 Pa. LEXIS 894

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided June 1, 1971·No. Appeals, Nos. 421 and 422·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

per Curiam,

The jury verdicts in favor of one of four similarly situated plaintiffs and in favor of defendant with respect to the other three plaintiffs, two of whom suffered undisputed property damage, are inconsistent ver[161]*161diets justifying a new trial as to all. See Thompson v. Iannuzzi, 403 Pa. 329, 169 A. 2d 777 (1961); Pascarella v. Pgh. Rwys. Co., 389 Pa. 8, 131 A. 2d 445 (1957). See also Kessler v. Matlack, 210 Pa. Superior Ct. 450, 233 A. 2d 592 (1967).

Orders granting new trials affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Bell took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. Mr. Justice Cohen took no part in the decision of this case.

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

Opinion

per Curiam,

The jury verdicts in favor of one of four similarly situated plaintiffs and in favor of defendant with respect to the other three plaintiffs, two of whom suffered undisputed property damage, are inconsistent ver[161]*161diets justifying a new trial as to all. See Thompson v. Iannuzzi, 403 Pa. 329, 169 A. 2d 777 (1961); Pascarella v. Pgh. Rwys. Co., 389 Pa. 8, 131 A. 2d 445 (1957). See also Kessler v. Matlack, 210 Pa. Superior Ct. 450, 233 A. 2d 592 (1967).

Orders granting new trials affirmed.

Mr. Chief Justice Bell took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. Mr. Justice Cohen took no part in the decision of this case.

Gross v. Lockwood Folding Box Corp., 277 A.2d 359, 443 Pa. 159, 1971 Pa. LEXIS 894 (Pa. 1971).

Pincite

277 A.2d 359 (Gross v. Lockwood Folding Box Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related