Groner v. Hedrick , 403 Pa. 148 ( 1961 )


Menu:
  • Dissenting Opinion by

    Mb. Justice Cohen:

    I fail to see the relevancy of debating whether the injury was caused by Sleepy’s affectionate or vicious action. I also fail to see how the majority can imply that “the economic pressure of the job” negated the plaintiff’s “knowledge of the facts and understanding of the risks” incident to her employment. This case falls within the clear and precise language of Section 521 of the Restatement (2d), Agency (1958). See also Jerdon v. Sirulnik, 400 Pa. 423, 162 A. 2d 202 (1960). Since the defendants have violated no duty that they owed to the plaintiff I would affirm the judgment of the court below.

Document Info

Docket Number: Appeal, 91

Citation Numbers: 403 Pa. 148

Judges: Jones, C.J., Bell, Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Bok and Eagen

Filed Date: 3/28/1961

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 8/22/2023