Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines v. Daisy McKenzie
PENNSYLVANIA GREYHOUND LINES, Appellant, v. Daisy McKENZIE, Appellee
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
Appellee recovered a $35,000 judgment in her personal injury suit against appellant, whose counsel admitted liability in his opening statement to the jury. Reversal is sought o.n the ground that, since the pretrial order did not include .the issue whether the accident caused or .aggravated appellee’s, rare systemic disease of scleroderma, the trial court erred .in permitting appellee to raise it. The ■record clearly shows, however, that appellant's counsel was-aware that appellee .was afflicted with the disease; that he professed some knowledge of its medical .aspects; and that he did not ask for ■a continuance. In light of these circumstances, appellant may not claim prejudice by surprise.
1
Since there is no error affecting.substantiakri.ghts, the judgment is Affirmed.
1
. Rabenovets v. Crossland, 1943, 78 U.S.App.D.C. 54 , 137 F.2d 675 .
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.