Seeherman v. Wilkes-Barre Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal No. 45, Jan. T., 1916, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., Jan. T., 1914, No. 132, on verdict for plaintiffs, in case of Louis Seeherman and Rosie Seeherman v. The Wilkes-Barre Company. Trespass to recover damages for the death of plaintiffs’ son. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. Verdict for plaintiffs for $3,287 and judgment thereon. Defendant appealed. Errors assigned were rulings on evidence and in refusing a continuance.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Potter,
In this action of trespass, Louis Seeherman and Eosie Seeherman, his wife, sought to recover from The Wilkes-Barre Company, a corporation engaged in' the manufacture and sale of electricity, damages for tfye death of their son, Isidor Seeherman, which it was alleged re-suited from the negligence of defendant.
It appears from the evidence that a barn on the premises of plaintiffs was lighted by electricity furnished by defendant. A lamp in the middle of the building, hung from the ceiling, and a switch beside the door controlled the light. On the evening of July 21,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Alexander v. Nanticoke Light Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Baran v. Reading Iron Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Delahunt v. United Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Hufnagle v. Delaware & Hudson Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Matteson v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- McCaffrey v. SchwartzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Brodie v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
- Boggs v. Jewell Tea Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Shinal, M., et ux, Aplts. v. Toms M.D., S.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
- Ozark Border Electric Cooperative v. StacyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1961
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.