Hotchkin v. Borough of Philipsburg
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
January Term, 1886, No. 452, E. D. Error to the Common Pleas of Centre County to review a judgment on a verdict for the defendant in an action of trespass on the case for negligence.
Read the full summary
January Term, 1886, No. 452, E. D. Error to the Common Pleas of Centre County to review a judgment on a verdict for the defendant in an action of trespass on the case for negligence. The facts as they appeared at the trial before Eurst, P. J., are stated in his charge to the jury which was as follows: This is an action on the case brought by Dr. G-. B. TIotchkin, the plaintiff, against the borough of Philipsburg, to recover damages which the plaintiff alleges he sustained by reason of an accident occurring on one of the public streets, in the borough of Philipsburg. In the very outset of this…
1Per curiam
The main contention in this case was whether the plaintiff was guilty of concurring negligence. While the answer to the second point submitted by the plaintiff may be subject to verbal criticism, yet when considered in connection with the whole charge, we think it did not mislead the jury. As a whole the charge is just and correct and the case was well presented to the jury.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by1 opinion
- State ex rel. Cientat v. Judge of the Twenty-Fourth Judicial District CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1880