Legal Opinion

Kaczynski v. Pittsburgh

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 7, 1932No. Appeal, 188PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

In this action of trespass for negligence, plaintiff recovered a verdict; the court below entered judgment for defendant non obstante veredicto, and plaintiff appeals. The judgment is right.

The facts are these: On a foggy night, plaintiff, while walking down a flight of steps, built and maintained by the city for passage from one of its upper streets to another on a lower level, stepped into a hole on a landing forming part of the flight. The hole was caused by the removal of a nine- or ten-inch plank; she admitted she had known of its absence for approximately three weeks, that…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. McManamon v. Hanover TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
  2. Levitt v. B/G Sandwich Shops, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  3. Purcell v. RiebeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
  4. Smith v. Shamokin BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Tharp v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
  2. Downing v. ShafferSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Bockstoce Et Ux. v. Pittsbgh. Rwys. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
  4. DeFonde v. Keystone Valley Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  5. Scurco v. KartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API