Laird v. Pittsburg Traction Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 259, Oct. T., 1894, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Allegheny Co., July T., 1898, No. 623, on verdict for plaintiff. Trespass for ejection of passenger. Before White, J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 259, Oct. T., 1894, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Allegheny Co., July T., 1898, No. 623, on verdict for plaintiff. Trespass for ejection of passenger. Before White, J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. The ticket which plaintiff received was in form as follows: Defendant’s points were among others as follows: “1st: If plaintiff is entitled to recover at all in this action, he is only entitled to recover damages for the trouble and inconvenience caused him by the delay in being put off the cable car at Craig street, and the additional expense…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Chiee Justice Stebbett,
In view of the undisputed facts and circumstances of this case, the ejection of plaintiff from defendant company’s car was an inexcusable trespass. There was therefore no error in refusing to withdraw the case from the jury and direct a verdict for the defendants; nor .was there any error in refusing to charge: “ That if plaintiff is entitled to recover at all in this action, he is only entitled to recover damages for the trouble and inconvenience caused him by the delay in being put off the cable car at Craig street, and the additional expense necessary…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Indianapolis Street Railway Co. v. WilsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1903
- Morrill v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
- Muldowney v. Pittsburg & Birmingham Traction Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Torak v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
- Golden v. Pittsburg Railways Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.