Case Name: Darla FRITZ and Gordon Fritz, Petitioners v. Hazel WRIGHT, Carolyn Temple, Bonnie Stuart, and Samuel Wright, Individually and Doing Business as Wright's Lane Properties, Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2005-10-04
Citations: 884 A.2d 250
Docket Number: 
Parties: Darla FRITZ and Gordon Fritz, Petitioners v. Hazel WRIGHT, Carolyn Temple, Bonnie Stuart, and Samuel Wright, Individually and Doing Business as Wright’s Lane Properties, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 884
Pages: 250–250

Head Matter:
Darla FRITZ and Gordon Fritz, Petitioners v. Hazel WRIGHT, Carolyn Temple, Bonnie Stuart, and Samuel Wright, Individually and Doing Business as Wright’s Lane Properties, Respondents.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Oct. 4, 2005.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM:
AND NOW, this 4th day of October 2005, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal in the above captioned matter is GRANTED, limited to the following issue:
Whether 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5104(b) and Article I, Section 6 of the Pennsylvania Constitution require that the same ten jurors must vote the same on each question listed on a special interrogatory verdict sheet for there to be a "verdict"?