Case Name: Lloyd, Appellant, v. Atterol Corporation
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1978-04-13
Citations: 255 Pa. Super. 628
Docket Number: Appeal, No. 1068
Parties: Lloyd, Appellant, v. Atterol Corporation.
Judges: HOFFMAN, J., dissented because there were sufficient issues of fact which, if the jury resolved them in appellant’s favor, would create liability.
Reporter: Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports
Volume: 255
Pages: 628–628

Head Matter:
387 A.2d 923
Lloyd, Appellant, v. Atterol Corporation.
Argued September 15, 1977.
Bernard Edelson, with him Caine, DiPasqua, Edelson, Patterson & Butler, for appellant;
Andrew J. Forbes, with him Cramp, D’lorio, McConchie, Forbes & Surrick, for appellee.

Opinion:
Order affirmed.
HOFFMAN, J., dissented because there were sufficient issues of fact which, if the jury resolved them in appellant's favor, would create liability.
WATKINS, former P. J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.