Natvig v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Me. Justice Kephaet,
Appellant charged defendant with the negligent operation of its trolley car, by which she sustained injuries. A verdict was recovered, which the court in banc set aside and entered judgment n. o. v.
The reason given for this action was that the testimony failed to disclose how far the trolley car was from the automobile when the appellant entered the car track, and that plaintiff voluntarily committed herself to a position of danger when the trolley car was so close that a collision was inevitable. In so concluding, the court in banc erred.
Appellant’s testimony…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- McAvoy v. KromerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Goater v. KlotzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Parker v. Matheson Motor Car Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
- Propert v. FlanaganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Raftery v. Pittsburgh & West Virginia Ry.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Wagner v. Somerset County Memorial Park, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
- Muslera v. Patton Clay Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Rice v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
- High v. Reading Transit Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Rines v. Witman (Et Al.)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.