Legal Opinion
Kracker v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided April 15, 1907No. Appeal, No. 13Published
Appeal, No. 13, Oct. T., 1906, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., March T., 1904, No. 828, refusing to take off nonsuit in ease of George Kracker v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before WlLTBANK, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court. At the trial the court entered a compulsory nonsuit which it subsequently refused to take off. Error assigned was refusal to take off nonsuit.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Beaver, J.,
The negligence of which the plaintiff complains is thus set forth in his statement:
“ When the said car was close to Wolf street, on its way south, plaintiff arose and called the attention of the conductor of the said car to the fact that he desired the same to stop, in order that he might alight. The conductor undertook, proceeded to, and in fact began to bring the car to a halt, and by so doing invited plaintiff to proceed to the lowest step at the side of the said car, which was of the construction known as a summer car, and stand upon the said lowest step, prepared to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Thane v. Scranton Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- Bumbear v. United Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Woodroffe v. Roxborough, Chestnut Hill & Norristown Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Bainbridge v. Union Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Rice v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906