White v. Columbia & Montour Electric Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 84, Jan. T., 1906, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Columbia Co., Sept. T., 1905, No. 107, on verdict for plaintiff in case of George White and Emily D. White v. The Columbia and Montour Electric Railway Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Staples, P. J., specially presiding. At the trial the jury returned a verdict of @5,000 for George White and @7,000 for Emily D. White.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 84, Jan. T., 1906, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Columbia Co., Sept. T., 1905, No. 107, on verdict for plaintiff in case of George White and Emily D. White v. The Columbia and Montour Electric Railway Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Staples, P. J., specially presiding. At the trial the jury returned a verdict of @5,000 for George White and @7,000 for Emily D. White. The court refused a motion for judgment for defendant non obstante veredicto. Hrror assigned was (1) in discharging rule for judgment for defendant non obstante veredicto, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
Appellant’s argument on the refusal of the court below to enter judgment for the defendant non obstante veredicto is based on the proposition that a mere description or characterization of the jerk in starting the car as excessive is not sufficient to prove negligence. But this overlooks the testimony of the plaintiff and her daughter, following the description of the jerk, that the car started before plaintiff had reasonable opportunity to be seated and that the jerk threw the mother down and caused the injuries complained of. The testimony of experienced witnesses as to the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Coyle v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
- Goodhart v. Columbia & Montour Electric Railway Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1908