Delair v. McAdoo.docx - Delair v McAdoo Supreme Court of Pennsylvania 1936 Facts:,the ,causinganaccident.Plaintifffiledsuit Procedural Hist

Delair v. McAdoo.docx - Delair v McAdoo Supreme Court of...

This preview shows page 1 out of 1 page.

Delair v. McAdooSupreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1936.Facts: Defendant was driving alongside Plaintiff and as Defendant was driving past, the tire exploded as they were alongside one another, causing an accident. Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant for negligence.Procedural History: Jury found for plaintiff for 7500. The court below granted defendant a new trial on the ground that the verdict was excessive, but refused his motionfor a judgment not withstanding the verdict. Issues: Was decision by the Trial Court correct in refusing to grant Defendant’s motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the ground that he was not negligent for failing to maintain his tires?Holding (and Judgment):Yes. The Court of Appeals said the jury was qualified to 
Background image

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read the whole page?

  • Fall '14
  • Marie Boyd
  • Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture