Legal Opinion

Reidel and Fishel v. P.R.T. Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 1, 1931No. Appeal 137PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Linn, J.,

Defendant appeals from judgment for plaintiff in a suit tried without a jury. Defendant was charged with negligently operating a street car that collided with a large covered motor truck belonging to plaintiff. The only witnesses called were the person who was in charge of the motor van and the man who repaired it. The first witness testified that he drove the truck to 2440 Germantown Avenue where he stopped, with the truck headed southward, for the purpose of unloading wall paper. He states that he left “sufficient clearance” between the truck and the trolley car track to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Rothweiler v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  2. Latella v. Breyer Ice Cream Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  3. Taormino v. Johnstown Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Pollock v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  2. Joannides, Admrx. v. NorrisSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. Maddock Maddock v. P.R.T. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  4. Reynolds v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1949

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

Powered by the Exa API