Case ID: pa_369/html/0348-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gross, Appellant, v. Clapper.
    Argued November 15, 1951.
    Before Drew, C. J., Stern, Stearne, Bell, Ladner and Chidsey, JJ.
    
      Archibald M. Matthews, for appellant.
    
      Joseph N. Cascio, with him Fike & Cascio, Paul E. C. Fike, Clarence L. Shaver and Shaver & Heckman, for appellees.
    
      January 16, 1952:
   Opinion

Per Curiam,

On this appeal from a judgment entered on a verdict for defendants, plaintiff has contended that certain instructions contained in the charge of the learned trial judge were erroneous and that the lower court should not have refused her motion for a new trial. However, plaintiff failed to make any objections to the charge and did not take any exceptions thereto, either specific or general. We cannot therefore review any of the alleged errors raised by plaintiff and must sustain the judgment of the court below: Senita v. Marcy, 324 Pa. 199, 188 A. 153.

Judgment affirmed.