Legal Opinion

Dixon v. Pennsylvania Railroad

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 11, 1930No. Appeal 2PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Rogers v. Phila. & Reading Railroad Co., 263 Pa. 429.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Linn, J.,

Husband and wife sued to recover for injury sustained by the wife in alighting from a train; the jury rendered a verdict for her; the court in banc granted defendant’s motion for judgment n. o. v. on the ground of her contributory negligence; she has appealed.

After the train stopped in the station at York, the porter placed the portable step-box in position below the car-steps to furnish continuous stepping facilities from the car platform to the station platform. According to plaintiff’s account, no one but the porter preceded her down the steps; the only passenger behind…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Young v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1902
  2. Twersky v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
  3. Murray v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  4. Rogers v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
  5. Rogers v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hellriegel v. Kaufmann & Baer Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
  2. Butterman v. D. L. W. R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
  3. Butterman v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API