Jermyn v. Skettino

47 Pa. D. & C. 108, 1943 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 371
CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lackawanna County
DecidedApril 14, 1943
Docketno. 465
StatusPublished

This text of 47 Pa. D. & C. 108 (Jermyn v. Skettino) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lackawanna County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Jermyn v. Skettino, 47 Pa. D. & C. 108, 1943 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 371 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1943).

Opinion

Leach, P. J.,

The statement in this case was amended. The amendment setting forth the negligence, instead of clarifying the issue, made it a triple alternative. Paragraph 6 sets forth “without providing either sufficient lighting or having the lighting device lit at or in the vicinity of the location of the said pipe railing”. Thus we do not know whether the charge of negligence is that defendant did not provide a light, or, second, did not have the light lit, or, third, had a light which was not sufficient for the purposes.

Now, April 14, 1943, rule for more specific statement is made absolute, and plaintiff is allowed 15 days to file a second amended statement.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
47 Pa. D. & C. 108, 1943 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 371, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jermyn-v-skettino-pactcompllackaw-1943.