Sprague v. Zeck
194 A. 904, 327 Pa. 592, 1937 Pa. LEXIS 598
Opinion
We are of one mind that the evidence in this record demonstrates that the questions of negligence and contributory negligence were for the jury. Nothing would be gained by a detailed recital of the facts, as that is all the motion for judgment n. o. v. calls for.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Sprague v. Zeck, 194 A. 904, 327 Pa. 592, 1937 Pa. LEXIS 598 (Pa. 1937).
194 A. 904 (Sprague v. Zeck) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Stranko v. Sugerman
195 A.2d 838 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1963)
McKniff v. Wilson
172 A.2d 801 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1961)