Irwin v. Pennsylvania Railroad
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 176, Oct. T., 1909, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Armstrong Co., Sept. T., 1908, No. 153, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Catherine A. Irwin v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company. Trespass to recover damages for death of plaintiff’s husband. Before Patton, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 176, Oct. T., 1909, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Armstrong Co., Sept. T., 1908, No. 153, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Catherine A. Irwin v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company. Trespass to recover damages for death of plaintiff’s husband. Before Patton, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. During the course of his charge the trial judge used the following language: [What you will award this plaintiff if you award her anything is the amount that the deceased would ordinarily have paid for the support and maintenance of his wife and minor children…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Fell,
The plaintiff’s husband was an engineer on the defendant’s road and was killed in an accident caused by the derailment of a freight car and its projection on the track on which his engine was running. The derailment of the car was caused by a broken flange of one of its wheels, and there was testimony tending to show that the break in the flange was an old one and existed when the car was received at the defendant’s yard, which was a place for regular inspection; that the break would have been discovered if a proper inspection had been made; that if any inspection…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Philadelphia & R. Ry. Co. v. MarlandCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1917
- Ross v. RiffleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Alio v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Glasco v. GreenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Sebring v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.