Propert v. Flanagan
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion bt
Mr. Justice Kephart,
This action was brought to recover for loss of a bam and outbuildings destroyed by fire. The court below directed a nonsuit for the reason plaintiff: failed to establish the fire was due to the negligence of defendant' alone; it might have come from one of three causes: a fire on another property adjoining defendant’s, a defective stove pipe in plaintiff’s washhouse, or the fire on appellee’s dump. The negligence charged and attempted to be proven was starting and continuing a fire in a dangerous place, among materials that were carried by high winds then ensuing.
2Cases cited14 opinions
- McAvoy v. KromerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- O'Malley v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Haverly v. State Line R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. HopeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
- Siever v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Hudson v. GraceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
- Fredericks v. Atlantic Refining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Wolk v. Pittsburgh Hotels Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Haddon v. SnellenburgSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Venzel v. Valley Camp Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.