Clement v. Adams Express Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 88, Oct. T., 1909, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 4, Phila. Co., March T., 1907, No. 3,490, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Hayes A. Clement v. Adams Express Company. Trespass to recover damages for the killing of a dog. Before Carr, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $350. Defendant appealed. Error assigned was in refusing judgment for defendant non obstante veredicto.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Henderson, J.,
The plaintiff’s declaration charged the defendant’s servant with having carelessly and recklessly driven a horse with a wagon attached thereto toward and over a dog belonging to the plaintiff, on Sixteenth street in the city of Philadelphia. The carelessness and recklessness alleged in the evidence was that the driver neglected to stop his horse or turn out of his course to avoid the dog which was in the middle of the street along the line on which the horse was moving. The plaintiff’s evidence shows that the driver was proceeding moderately on an ascending grade; that…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Moore v. Electric Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Saint Louis, Arkansas & Texas Railway Co. v. HauksTexas Supreme Court · 1890
- Smith v. St. Paul City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- Fink v. EvansTennessee Supreme Court · 1895
- Meisch v. Rochester Electric Railway Co.New York Supreme Court · 1893
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.