Politowski v. Burnham
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 288, Jan. T., 1905, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Pbila. Co., March. T., 1904, No. 8,611, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of Maryan Politowski v. George Burnham et al., trading as Burnham, Williams & Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Bregy, J. The facts appear by the- opinion of the Supreme Court. The court entered a compulsory nonsuit which it subsequently refused to take off.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 288, Jan. T., 1905, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Pbila. Co., March. T., 1904, No. 8,611, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of Maryan Politowski v. George Burnham et al., trading as Burnham, Williams & Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Bregy, J. The facts appear by the- opinion of the Supreme Court. The court entered a compulsory nonsuit which it subsequently refused to take off. Error assigned was order refusing to take off- nonsuit.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Elkin,
The learned court below refused to take off a nonsuit directed to be entered at the trial and this appeal is intended to test the correctness of that ruling. The appellant relies on the rule of law that a motion for a nonsuit admits all the facts and inferences that may be fairly drawn from the same proven by the plaintiff at the trial. This contention is amply supported by our cases. It does not follow, however, that in the case at bar such facts were offered in evidence as to permit a jury to draw an inference of negligence. A jury cannot be permitted to find…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Philadelphia & Reading Railroad v. HummellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1863
3Cited by3 opinions
- Cunningham v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Barrage v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Meyers v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916