Walsh v. Wilkes-Barre

64 A. 407, 215 Pa. 226, 1906 Pa. LEXIS 768
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedMay 7, 1906
DocketAppeal, No. 123
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 64 A. 407 (Walsh v. Wilkes-Barre) 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
Walsh v. Wilkes-Barre, 64 A. 407, 215 Pa. 226, 1906 Pa. LEXIS 768 (Pa. 1906).

Opinion

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Mestrezat,

For the reasons given in the opinion handed down herewith in Wagner v. Hazle Township, ante, p. 219, we are compelled to reverse this judgment for the improper remark of appellee’s counsel to the jury which was manifestly prejudicial to the defendant. It was wholly immaterial and irrelevant in the trial of this cause who might be ultimately liable for the damages recovered in the case, and the statement of the appellee’s counsel to the jury that the Lehigh & Wilkes-Barre Coal Company would be liable finally for the damages was prejudicial to the defendant. The effect of the remark would be to increase the amount of the verdict by invoking the antagonism to corporations which is sometimes found in juries and which is often made apparent by their verdicts. Although the objectionable remark was called to the attention of the trial judge before he charged the jury, he did not attempt to withdraw it from the jury or to admonish that body to disregard it. It apparently went to the jury with the court’s approval.

[228]*228The second and third assignments of error are without merit and are overruled.

The first assignment is sustained and the judgment is reversed with a venire facias de novo.

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

Related

Burnley, D. v. Loews Hotel
2026 Pa. Super. 43 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2026)
Trimble v. Merloe
197 A.2d 457 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1964)
Narciso v. Mauch Chunk Township
87 A.2d 233 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1952)
O'Donnell v. Philadelphia Record Co.
51 A.2d 775 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1946)
Wolf v. Gross
38 Pa. D. & C. 413 (Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas, 1940)
Kaplan v. Loev
194 A. 653 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1937)
Baymond v. Sternberger
176 A. 787 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1934)
Winslow v. Snyder
13 Pa. D. & C. 566 (Alleghany County Court of Common Pleas, 1930)
Riedel v. Royce
279 P. 631 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1929)
Cora P. King v. F. Keller (No. 1)
90 Pa. Super. 596 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1927)
Bullock v. Chester & Darby Telford Road Co.
113 A. 379 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1921)
Kelly v. Scranton Railway Co.
112 A. 748 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1921)
Scranton Gas & Water Co. v. Weston
63 Pa. Super. 570 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1916)
Knoller v. Everett Realty Co.
59 Pa. Super. 544 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1915)
Brown v. City of Scranton
80 A. 1113 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1911)
Stern v. Johnston
38 Pa. Super. 1 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1908)
Lenahan v. Pittston Coal Mining Co.
70 A. 884 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1908)
Freeman v. Wilkes-Barre & Wyoming Valley Traction Co.
36 Pa. Super. 166 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1908)
Hollis v. United States Glass Co.
69 A. 55 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1908)
Fisher v. Pennsylvania Co.
34 Pa. Super. 500 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
64 A. 407, 215 Pa. 226, 1906 Pa. LEXIS 768, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walsh-v-wilkes-barre-pa-1906.