Pender v. Raggs
This text of 35 A. 1135 (Pender v. Raggs) 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.
Opinion
Plaintiff’s right to recover in this case depended on questions of fact which were for the exclusive consideration of the jury; and they were accordingly submitted to them by the learned president of the common pleas with full, clear, well guarded [342]*342and accurate instructions, under which they rendered a'Verdict that has impliedly settled every material question of fact in plaintiff’s favor. There appears to be no error in any of the court’s rulings or instructions. The case was ably and accurately tried and the judgment entered on the verdict should not be disturbed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
35 A. 1135, 178 Pa. 337, 1896 Pa. LEXIS 1174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pender-v-raggs-pa-1896.