Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

CALDERAIO v. ROSS. (03/20/59)

March 20, 1959

CALDERAIO, APPELLANT,
v.
ROSS.



Appeal, No. 57, Jan. T., 1958, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County, March T., 1955, No. 1318, in case of Anthony J. Calderaio v. Richard B. Ross. Judgment of non pros entered; reargument refused April 27, 1959.

COUNSEL

Louis Mitchell Paul, with him Charles A. Greene, Jr., for appellant.

Jack Brian, with him Berman, Richard & Brian, for appellee.

Before Jones, C.j., Bell, Musmanno, Jones, Cohen and Mcbride, JJ.

Author: Bell

[ 395 Pa. Page 197]

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE BELL

This is an appeal from the refusal of the Court below to remove a compulsory non-suit entered by the trial Judge.

Plaintiff filed his complaint in trespass alleging property damages to his automobile and personal injuries arising out of a collision with defendant's car on May 31, 1955. Written interrogatories were served on plaintiff on October 28, 1955, and although frequently requested, plaintiff did not serve answers thereto until May 2, 1956.

The case came up for trial on May 9, 1956. Plaintiff made out a prima facie case of negligence, but when he attempted to introduce testimony as to his property damage and personal injuries, namely, laceration of the elbow, defendant objected because plaintiff had

[ 395 Pa. Page 198]

    failed to adequately answer defendant's interrogatories as to car repairs, doctors' bills and loss of earnings. These objections were sustained. The trial Court continued the case in order that plaintiff might make a sufficient answer to defendant's interrogatories.

The case came up for trial the second time on October 23, 1956. Plaintiff's testimony as to loss of earnings was again rejected by the trial Judge because of the inadequacy of plaintiff's supplemental answers to defendant's interrogatories.

During the second trial plaintiff became ill and was granted a continuance. The trial Judge admonished plaintiff for the second time to make adequate ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.