Weiss v. London Guarantee & Accident Co.
127 A. 450, 282 Pa. 127, 1925 Pa. LEXIS 582
Opinion
This is an appeal from an order granting a new trial. Since the record does not demonstrate clear error of law or abuse of discretion on the part of the court below in making the order assigned as error, the assignment must be overruled: Class & Nachod Brewing Co. v. Giacobello, 277 Pa. 530; Republic Mortgage Co. v. Irwin et al., 278 Pa. 124; Babbitt v. Jackson, 279 Pa. 480.
The order appealed from is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Weiss v. London Guarantee & Accident Co., 127 A. 450, 282 Pa. 127, 1925 Pa. LEXIS 582 (Pa. 1924).
127 A. 450 (Weiss v. London Guarantee & Accident Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Dorris v. Bridgman & Co.
137 A. 609 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1927)
Harkai v. Pisano
88 Pa. Super. 475 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1926)
March v. Philadelphia & West Chester Traction Co.
132 A. 355 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1926)
Weiss v. London Guarantee & Accident Co.
132 A. 120 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1926)
Electric City Motors, Inc. v. Ross
87 Pa. Super. 327 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1925)
Rittenhouse v. Exeter MacHine Works, Inc.
129 A. 91 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1925)