Edsberg v. Baldwin Locomotive Works
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 79, Jan. T., 1913, ..by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Philadelphia Co., March T., 1911, No. 3143, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Carl Edsberg v. Baldwin Locomotive Works.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 79, Jan. T., 1913, ..by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Philadelphia Co., March T., 1911, No. 3143, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Carl Edsberg v. Baldwin Locomotive Works. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. . Before Magill, J. From the record it appeared that Carl Edsberg, the . plaintiff, was a structural iron worker employed by Brann & Stewart, contractors, and was sent with other workmen to re-enforce trestle work in a yard of the Baldwin Locomotive Works in Philadelphia. On August 4th, 1910, he was engaged in drilling holes in an iron girder…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Elkin,
At the trial the learned court below refused'a point'for binding instructions in favor of the defendant, and Subsequently overruled the motion for judgment non Obstante veredicto, upon the whole record. These rulings are made the subject of the two assignments of error upon which appellant relies. The decision of the case depends entirely upon the question whether it was for the jury or for the court. Of Course, the burden was on the plaintiff to establish by competent testimony the negligence of the defendant, and his case in chief must not disclose contributory…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Thorson v. Carnegie Steel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hozian v. Crucible Steel Casting Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1937
- Szofran v. Century Electric Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1953
- Hastings v. South Shore RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Dyer v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Papilios v. Best Manufacturing Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1914