McEwen v. Hoopes

34 A. 623, 175 Pa. 237, 1896 Pa. LEXIS 1240
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 27, 1896·No. Appeal, No. 236·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

It is contended on behalf of the plaintiff that the learned trial judge erred in not submitting this case to the jury on the testimony before them; but, our consideration of the evidence has led us to the conclusion that, if the case had been thus submitted, and the jury had found for the plaintiff, a sense of duty would have constrained the court below to set the verdict aside, especially on the ground that there was no sufficient evidence of the alleged negligence of the defendants. That being so, according to the recognized legal test in such cases, there was no error in directing a verdict in favor of the defendants.

There is nothing in either of the assignments of error that requires further discussion.

Judgment affirmed.

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

McEwen v. Hoopes, 34 A. 623, 175 Pa. 237, 1896 Pa. LEXIS 1240 (Pa. 1896).

34 A. 623 (McEwen v. Hoopes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pflaum v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Co.
67 Pa. Super. 515 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1917)
Creachen v. Bromley Bros. Carpet Co.
63 A. 195 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1906)