History
  • No items yet
midpage
Schomaker v. Heinz
77 Pa. Super. 30
Pa. Super. Ct.
1921
Check Treatment

Opinion by

Orlady, P. J.,

The question involved, as submitted by the appellant is as follows:

“Was there a disputed question of fact under the pleadings and evidence requiring this case to be submitted to the jury.”

The trial-judge directed the jury that there was no fact in dispute for them to determine, and that the defendant was entitled to a verdict. On a motion for a new trial, and for judgment non obstante veredicto, the court in banc in an opinion filed refused the motions and directed judgment to be entered on the verdict.

This opinion disposes of every question raised by the assignment, and for the reasons therein given the judgment is affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Schomaker v. Heinz
Court Name: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Date Published: Jul 14, 1921
Citation: 77 Pa. Super. 30
Docket Number: Appeal, No. 50
Court Abbreviation: Pa. Super. Ct.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.