Chiaverini v. Sewickley Valley Hospital

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• once appellate court determined new trial was required on one asserted ground, other grounds for new trial based on allegedly erroneous evidentiary rulings need not be decided
• jury verdict was inconsistent where the jury found that defendant’s negligence was not a substantial factor in bringing about plaintiff's harm but nevertheless awarded plaintiff damages as a result of the incident
• where jury determined that defendant was negligent and that his negligence was not a substantial factor in causing the jury’s harm, but then indicated that defendant was to pay the plaintiff fifty thousand dollars, trial court should not have accepted the verdict

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).