Burton v. Horn & Hardart Baking Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
*65Dissenting Opinion by
Mb. Justice Musmanno:
The majority opinion says: “All that plaintiff’s evidence established was that she slipped on steps that were slightly wet, apparently because they had just been washed.” (italics supplied) But as I view it, that is the whole crux of the case. The negligence lay in the very fact that the defendant’s employe liad washed down the steps and did not take the precautionary measures to rope off the stairs until they had dried, or to warn patrons of the slipperiness of the steps in their wet condition. We all know that in office buildings or in our own homes…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Nettis v. General Tire Co. of Philadelphia, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Strobel v. ParkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Flora v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Dalgleish v. Oppenheim, Collins & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Loney Et Ux. v. DenenbergSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.