Rago v. Nelson

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Rago v. Nelson

170 A.2d 116, 404 Pa. 91, 1961 Pa. LEXIS 539

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMay 2, 1961

DocketAppeals, Nos. 84 and 85

StatusPublished

This text of 170 A.2d 116 (Rago v. Nelson) 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.

Bluebook

Rago v. Nelson, 170 A.2d 116, 404 Pa. 91, 1961 Pa. LEXIS 539 (Pa. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

pee Cueiam,

The charge of the trial court in this case was erroneous in that it failed to properly and adequately instruct the jury on the following subjects (inter alia): contributory negligence, assured clear distance rule, duties of motorists at intersections and at stop signs, damages.

The Superior Court has already ordered a new trial in the action by Mark Rago against Ralph S. Nelson and Doris J. Rago as additional defendant for the damage to Rago’s automobile. That part of the Superior Court’s order is affirmed. Otherwise it is reversed and a new trial generally is ordered for all parties and all actions involved.

Mr. Justice Bell dissents, and would affirm the orders of the Superior Court.

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

Opinion

pee Cueiam,

The charge of the trial court in this case was erroneous in that it failed to properly and adequately instruct the jury on the following subjects (inter alia): contributory negligence, assured clear distance rule, duties of motorists at intersections and at stop signs, damages.

The Superior Court has already ordered a new trial in the action by Mark Rago against Ralph S. Nelson and Doris J. Rago as additional defendant for the damage to Rago’s automobile. That part of the Superior Court’s order is affirmed. Otherwise it is reversed and a new trial generally is ordered for all parties and all actions involved.

Mr. Justice Bell dissents, and would affirm the orders of the Superior Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 A.2d 116, 404 Pa. 91, 1961 Pa. LEXIS 539, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rago-v-nelson-pa-1961.