Legal Opinion
Gardner v. Consolidated Rail Corp. SEPTA
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided April 26, 1990No. 40 E.D. Appeal Docket 1989PublishedCited by 60 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
FLAHERTY, Justice.
These cases, consolidated for appeal, raise the question of whether a city may be held liable when children going to or from holes in city-owned fences are injured on neighboring land through instrumentalities not created by the city and not in the city’s control.
In Gardner, a seven year old boy was injured by a train on land owned by a third party after he climbed through a hole in a fence bordering railroad tracks and attempted to cross the tracks on his way to another hole in a fence on the other side of the tracks next to a municipal playground.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sinn v. BurdSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
- Mascaro v. Youth Study CenterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Morena v. South Hills Health SystemSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Leong Ex Rel. Petagno v. TakasakiHawaii Supreme Court · 1974
- Gradel v. InouyeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- Althaus Ex Rel. Althaus v. CohenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Atcovitz v. Gulph Mills Tennis Club, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Kleinknecht v. Gettysburg CollegeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Lindstrom v. City of CorrySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Newell v. Montana West, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.