Legal Opinion

Pool v. Van

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided February 26, 1909No. Appeal, No. 134PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal, No. 134, Oct. T., 1908, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Clearfield Co., Feb. T., 1908, No. 113, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of James Pool v. Woody Van. Trespass to recover damages for death of a horse. Before A. O. Smith, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. The trial judge entered a compulsory nonsuit which he subsequently refused to take off. Error assigned was order refusing to take off nonsuit.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Beaver, J.,

Assuming the facts relating to this case as contained in the counterstatement of the appellee, they are as follows: “On January 4,1908, between 11:00 o’clock and 11:30 o’clock a. m., a band connected with a theatrical company marched west along Market street in the borough of Clearfield. When it reached the intersection of Second street, the band circled and stood on the roadway at the intersection, playing a selection. Around the band gathered and pressed a large concourse of people. Between the mass formed by the band and the encircling crowd and the curb at the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Fairbanks v. Kerr & SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1872
  2. Commonwealth v. AllenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
  3. Coulter v. Pine TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
  4. Scott v. HunterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1863
  5. Clulow v. McClellandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Ramsey v. MartinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API