Wright v. Pittsburg Railways Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 117, Oct. T., 1908, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Feb. T.., 1906, No. 100, on verdict for plaintiffs in case of Joseph L. Wright and Elizabeth Wright, his wife, v. Pittsburg Railways Company. Trespass to recover damages for death of plaintiffs’ son. Before Kennedy, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Yerdict and judgment for plaintiffs, for $2,170. Defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 117, Oct. T., 1908, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 3, Allegheny Co., Feb. T.., 1906, No. 100, on verdict for plaintiffs in case of Joseph L. Wright and Elizabeth Wright, his wife, v. Pittsburg Railways Company. Trespass to recover damages for death of plaintiffs’ son. Before Kennedy, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Yerdict and judgment for plaintiffs, for $2,170. Defendant appealed. Error assigned was refusal of binding instructions for defendant.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Me. Justice Beown,
The son of the plaintiffs, at the time of the collision which resulted in his death, was eleven years and five months old. In company with two other boys he was in a two-wheeled pony cart, driving a pony. This was with the permission of his father, who for some time before had allowed him to drive his team on the streets of the East End, Pittsburg, upon which street railway tracks were laid. The father stated that he had no hesitation in trusting him alone with his pony and cart. When the team was struck by a car of the defendant the boy was driving it as an…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Murphy v. Phila. Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Bready v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
- Humes v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1915