Hucaluk v. Clyde Realty Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Musmanno :
The defendants in this case were not running an elevator; they were operating a guillotine. They provided for a nice, convenient hole in the elevator shaft, just big enough for a head to fit into so that a descending elevator could decapitate, crush or mangle the *177mortal calling for transportation. The head-hole was allowed, and this method of elevator-calling permitted, in violation of law, in defiance of safety regulations, and in opposition to every rule of care and precaution owing by landlords to tenants of a building.
The Clyde Building, in which…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Kasanovich v. GeorgeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
- McCracken v. Curwensville BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Bisson v. John B. Kelly, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Jones v. American Caramel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Ferry v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.