Emmelt v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Henderson, J.,
The verdict must be accepted as establishing the facts and reasonable inferences deducible therefrom developed in support of the action, as the appellant asked for judgment in its favor non obstante veredicto. The street car was moving eastwardly on Vine Street while the plaintiff was driving northwardly on 53rd Street. He had a right to cross the street in the exercise of the due care required in the circumstances. No rule of law prohibited the plaintiff from crossing the track merely because a trolley car was in sight coming toward the intersection of the two…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Welsh v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- Dunn v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- McLoughlin v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
3Cited by3 opinions
- Schaeffer v. Reading Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Sexauer v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Thompson v. Reading Transit Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1930