Reynolds v. Braithwaite
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
APPEAL BY DEFENDANT FROM THE COURT OF COMMON -PLEAS NO. 2 OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 151 October Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 275 October Term 1889, C. P. No 2. On September 3, 1888, a summons in trespass was served in an action by B. F. Reynolds against Wm. Braitliwaite and Sarah Braitliwaite, his wife. Issue.
Read the full summary
APPEAL BY DEFENDANT FROM THE COURT OF COMMON -PLEAS NO. 2 OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 151 October Term 1889, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 275 October Term 1889, C. P. No 2. On September 3, 1888, a summons in trespass was served in an action by B. F. Reynolds against Wm. Braitliwaite and Sarah Braitliwaite, his wife. Issue. At the close of the testimony, at the trial on May 22, 1889, the court, Ewing P. J., charged the jury: ' Counsel for defendant have asked us to instruct you on a large number of points, the first being that under all the evidence your verdict must be for defendants; on the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion,
Mr. Justice McCollum :
As the specifications of error from one to eight inclusive, are not in compliance with the Rule of Court, they will not be considered. The remaining specifications raise but two questions. The first of these relates to the responsibility of William Braithwaite for the acts complained of, and the second to the charge of the court on the subject of damages.
The appellant contends that the cause of action arose from the acts of an independent contractor, who alone is liable for the injury inflicted by them. It is a well-settled general rule that a party who has…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Cimorelli v. New York Cent. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1945
- First Presbyterian Congregation v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894
- Ky. Heating Co. v. HoodCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1909
- Thibadeau v. Clarinda Copper Mining Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1928
- Foehr v. New York Short Line RailroadSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.