Montgomery County Law Reporter

Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: Joseph J. Somers v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company. in cases of the character now before us. This verdict is not large, if the plaintiff suffered a permanent injury, not even if full restoration follows in a few years. No doubt the jury found that recovery within a few years was reasonably probable....
More Description

Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: Joseph J. Somers v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company. in cases of the character now before us. This verdict is not large, if the plaintiff suffered a permanent injury, not even if full restoration follows in a few years. No doubt the jury found that recovery within a few years was reasonably probable. And now, March 3rd, 1911, the reasons for a new trial are dismissed and a new trial is refused. Judgment will be entered upon the verdict of the jury, when the verdict fee is paid. By the Court. (Eaurt of Qlammatt IfcHran of fHmitiimnmj Olaunty Commonwealth v. W. Gordon Dyer. In a motion to quash writ of certlorarl Issued erroneously in the name of Commonwealth, Plaintiff and Defendant in error, and W. Gordon Dyer, Defendant and Plaintiff In error, the words below being omitted. Held, that such omission does not constitute a material mistake. Acknowledgment of a Bond attacked on the ground of informality, cures the defect. No. 5, December Term, 1910. Certiorari. Exceptions and motion to quash certiorari. J. B. Larzelere, District Attorney, Attorney for Commonwealth. Louis M. Childs and Henry M. Brownback, Attorneys for Defendant. Opinion by H. K. Weand, J. The Commonwealth moves to quash the writ and assigns several reasons, inter alia: 1st. That the praecipe issued in name of Commonwealth, Plaintiff and Defendant in error, and W. Gordon Dyer, Defendant and Plaintiff in error, etc. This is a mistake. The praecipe says, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Plaintiff and Defendant in error, v. W. Gordon Dyer, Defendant and Plaintiff in error. The words below being omitted. The certiorari says, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Plaintiff below and DeCommonwealth v. W. Gordon Dyer. fendant in error, and W. Gordon Dyer, Defendant below and Plain..