Kraft v. Carpenter
23 A.2d 493, 343 Pa. 404, 1942 Pa. LEXIS 290
Opinion
This is an action to recover damages alleged to have been caused to plaintiff by being bitten by defendant’s dog. The verdict was for defendant. The trial judge granted a new trial, stating as his reason that he had improperly, instructed the jury on the law as laid down in Fink v. Miller, 330 Pa. 193, 198 A. 666, and had put too heavy a burden upon plaintiff. We think the judge was correct in this conclusion. Under these circumstances, we will not interfere with the grant of a new trial. .
Order affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Kraft v. Carpenter, 23 A.2d 493, 343 Pa. 404, 1942 Pa. LEXIS 290 (Pa. 1941).
23 A.2d 493 (Kraft v. Carpenter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Fink v. Miller
198 A. 666 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1938)