Cerino v. Philadelphia
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Roberts:
I am of the opinion that Mrs. Cerino cannot be said to have been guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law. I reach this conclusion both on the basis of the factual scenario painted by the majority and on the basis of the facts as I think they should have been developed and considered.
My first difficulty with the majority’s opinion stems from their unspoken approval of the trial court’s action in excluding as inadmissible the answers to interrogatories given by Mrs. Cerino before her death.
Rule 4005(c) of the Pa. R. C. P. provides that:…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company v. Alva Coal Corporation and Peabody Coal CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1966
- Public Service Co. v. ElliottCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1941