“While, of course, we have ruled that a gratuitous reference to personal liability insurance in personal injury cases is ground for a mistrial, we have never said that the mention of insurance, per se, like dynamite with a live fuse, will blow up the case.”
How later courts described this case
- “While, of course, we have ruled that a gratuitous reference to personal liability insurance in personal injury cases is ground for a mistrial, we have never said that the mention of insurance, per se, like dynamite with a live fuse, will blow up the case.”
- trial court committed reversible error by precluding cross-examination of witness concerning his employment by the insurance company which would be responsible for payment of any verdict against defendant
- plurality opinion by Musmanno, J.
- error to refuse questioning of private investigator hired by insurance company concerning his employment
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Concurring Opinion by
Mr. Justice Cohen:
I concur in the result on the authority of Argo v. Goodstein, 424 Pa. 612 , 228 A. 2d 195 (1967); Yarsunas v. Boros, 423 Pa. 364 , 223 A. 2d 696 (1966); Kersey Manufacturing Co. v. Rozic, 422 Pa. 564 , 222 A. 2d. 713 (1966), and Gould v. Argiro, 422 Pa. 433 , 220 A. 2d 654 (1960).