Philadelphia, Wilmington & Baltimore Railroad v. Stinger
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia: Of July Term 1873, No. 9. This was an action on the case, brought to September Term 1871, of the court below, by Daniel Stinger against the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad Company.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia: Of July Term 1873, No. 9. This was an action on the case, brought to September Term 1871, of the court below, by Daniel Stinger against the Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore Railroad Company. The declaration was, that the plaintiff was driving his horse and wagon in which he was riding, on Gray’s Ferry avenue in the city of Philadelphia, alongside of which the defendant’s railroad was located; that the defendant’s servant, in propelling a locomotive on their railroad, “ made such great noise and shrieks by blowing a whistle connected with the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Paxson
This case presents two questions: The first is whether the engineer of the train was guilty of negligence in blowing the alarm *225whistle; the second, whether the plaintiff below was chargeable with contributory negligence in driving a horse admitted by him to be afraid of the cars, upon Gray’s Ferry road, alongside of the railroad, at the time in question.
Negligence has been defined to be the absence of care, according to the circumstances: Turnpike Co. v. The Railroad Co., 4 P. F. Smith 845. In some cases, the blowing of the steam-whistle of a locomotive has been held to be negligence; in…
2Cited by15 opinions
- Parsons v. Crown Disposal Co.California Supreme Court · 1997
- Kinyon v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- Delaware R. v. Jones, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Luzerne County1889
- Maier v. Publicker Commercial Alcohol Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1945
- Mitchell v. RailroadTennessee Supreme Court · 1898
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.