Hand v. Nagler

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Hand v. Nagler

153 A. 912, 302 Pa. 328, 1931 Pa. LEXIS 661

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedDecember 3, 1930

DocketAppeal, 325

StatusPublished

This text of 153 A. 912 (Hand v. Nagler) 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

Hand v. Nagler, 153 A. 912, 302 Pa. 328, 1931 Pa. LEXIS 661 (Pa. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Plaintiff appeals from the order of the court below refusing to take off a nonsuit. Appellant was struck by defendants’ automobile while crossing Lancaster Avenue where it intersects with Fortieth Street and Haverford Avenue, in the City of Philadelphia. The trial judge entered a compulsory nonsuit because plaintiff’s evidence was insufficient to prove negligence on the part of defendants’ agent operating the car, and, after reading and considering the evidence presented in the record, we see no error in that conclusion.

The order is affirmed.

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

Per Curiam,

Plaintiff appeals from the order of the court below refusing to take off a nonsuit. Appellant was struck by defendants’ automobile while crossing Lancaster Avenue where it intersects with Fortieth Street and Haverford Avenue, in the City of Philadelphia. The trial judge entered a compulsory nonsuit because plaintiff’s evidence was insufficient to prove negligence on the part of defendants’ agent operating the car, and, after reading and considering the evidence presented in the record, we see no error in that conclusion.

The order is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

153 A. 912, 302 Pa. 328, 1931 Pa. LEXIS 661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hand-v-nagler-pa-1930.