From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Engelhard v. Nordman

Superior Court of Pennsylvania
May 5, 1924
83 Pa. Super. 199 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1924)

Opinion

April 28, 1924.

May 5, 1924.

Practice, C.P. — Judgments non obstante veredicto — Act of April 22, 1905, P.L. 286 — Point for binding instructions — Appeals — Quashing appeals.

An appeal from refusal of defendant's motion for judgment non obstante veredicto will be dismissed, where the record shows that the motion was not based upon a written point, presented at the time of trial, requesting binding instructions.

Appeal, No. 31, April T., 1924, by defendant, from judgment of C.P. Allegheny Co., Oct. T., 1920, No. 2359, on verdict for plaintiff in the case of E.F. Engelhard v. J.J. Nordman.

Before HENDERSON, TREXLER, KELLER, LINN and GAWTHROP, JJ. Appeal dismissed.

Assumpsit on contract of purchase and sale. Before CARPENTER, J.

Verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $594.50, and judgment thereon. Defendant appealed.

Error assigned was refusal of defendant's motion for judgment non obstante veredicto.

Arthur O. Fording, for appellant.

John E. Winner, and with him Frank I. Gollmar, for appellee.


Argued April 28, 1924.


As the motion for judgment n.o.v. was not supported by a written point for binding instructions as required by the statute, it was properly refused. The appeal is dismissed: Standard Brewing Co. v. Knapp, 79 Pa. Super. 252.


Summaries of

Engelhard v. Nordman

Superior Court of Pennsylvania
May 5, 1924
83 Pa. Super. 199 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1924)
Case details for

Engelhard v. Nordman

Case Details

Full title:Engelhard v. Nordman, Appellant

Court:Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: May 5, 1924

Citations

83 Pa. Super. 199 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1924)

Citing Cases

Leonard Co. v. Scranton Bottl'g Co.

Clarence Balentine, and with him William M. Curry, for appellant — The requirements of the Act of April 22,…