Samuel Cresswell and Janet Cresswell, His Wife v. Axel Axelrod

Third Circuit

Samuel Cresswell and Janet Cresswell, His Wife v. Axel Axelrod

222 F.2d 367, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 3822

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided May 31, 1955·No. 11560_1·Published

Opinion

*368 PER CURIAM.

In this automobile personal injuries case, counsel for appellant argued carefully and capably that the judgment is contrary to the weight of the evidence and to the Pennsylvania incontrovertible physical facts rule. We think that under the evidence these matters were for the jury and the trial court. With reference to the form of the verdict, the error, if any, was- unsubstantial.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

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

*368 PER CURIAM.

In this automobile personal injuries case, counsel for appellant argued carefully and capably that the judgment is contrary to the weight of the evidence and to the Pennsylvania incontrovertible physical facts rule. We think that under the evidence these matters were for the jury and the trial court. With reference to the form of the verdict, the error, if any, was- unsubstantial.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

Samuel Cresswell and Janet Cresswell, His Wife v. Axel Axelrod, 222 F.2d 367, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 3822 (3d Cir. 1955).

Pincite

222 F.2d 367 (Samuel Cresswell and Janet Cresswell, His Wife v. Axel Axelrod) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.