Beard v. Reading City Passenger Railway Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 115, Nov. T., 1896, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Berks Co., June T., 1895, No. 34, on verdict for plaintiff. Trespass for a collision.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 115, Nov. T., 1896, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Berks Co., June T., 1895, No. 34, on verdict for plaintiff. Trespass for a collision. Before Endlich, J. The facts appear from the opinion of the Superior Court as follows: “ The plaintiff in the court below, an infant of five years of age, by his mother and next friend, brought his action to recover damages from the defendant for personal injuries sustained by him at the intersection of North 10th street, upon which one of its cars was running northward, and Oley street which was to be crossed in the city of Reading. The…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Beaver, J.,
(after stating the facts as above) :
The only question in the case is as to whether or not the court should have submitted the question of the negligence of the defendant to the jury. This question is raised in various ways. At the close of the plaintiff’s testimony, the defendant moved for a compulsory nonsuit which motion was disallowed. The action of the court in refusing the nonsuit is assigned for error. It has been many times held that no writ of error lies to the refusal to grant a nonsuit: Pownall v. Steele, 52 Pa. 446; Mobley v. Bruner, 59 Pa. 481. The fourth…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Mobley v. BrunerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
- Pownall v. SteeleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1866
3Cited by1 opinion
- McAmbley v. MartinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930