Lamb v. Kates

85 Pa. Super. 438, 1925 Pa. Super. LEXIS 298
CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 30, 1924
DocketAppeal, 180
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 85 Pa. Super. 438 (Lamb v. Kates) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lamb v. Kates, 85 Pa. Super. 438, 1925 Pa. Super. LEXIS 298 (Pa. Ct. App. 1924).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Every disputed question in this case was fairly referred to the jury, and it was instructed several times that before the plaintiff could recover, he must convince the jury from his evidence that it was through his efforts that the sale was made; in other words, that he was the direct, immediate and efficient cause of the sale. The motion for judgment non obstante veredicto was urged upon a single allegation of error, — that under all the evidence in the case, the verdict should be for the defendant.

We find no reversible error in the record and affirm the judgment as entered on the verdict.

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

Related

Shapira v. Union Trust Co., Exr.
158 A. 564 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
85 Pa. Super. 438, 1925 Pa. Super. LEXIS 298, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lamb-v-kates-pasuperct-1924.