Foreman v. Pennsylvania R. R.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 137, Jan. T., 1894, by plaintiff, Edward Foreman, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., March T., 1889, No. 410, entering nonsuit. Trespass for personal injuries. The facts appear by the following opinion of the court below refusing to take off compulsory nonsuit: “ This action was brought .to recover for personal injuries. The plaintiff lived at Paoli, and it was his custom to take the 5.55 A. M. train from that place to his business in Philadelphia.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 137, Jan. T., 1894, by plaintiff, Edward Foreman, from judgment of C. P. No. 2, Phila. Co., March T., 1889, No. 410, entering nonsuit. Trespass for personal injuries. The facts appear by the following opinion of the court below refusing to take off compulsory nonsuit: “ This action was brought .to recover for personal injuries. The plaintiff lived at Paoli, and it was his custom to take the 5.55 A. M. train from that place to his business in Philadelphia. At Paoli station there are three tracks, the south track on which trains for Philadelphia run, the middle tracks used for…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
At Paoli station, where plaintiff was injured, the defendant company had three tracks. Passenger trains for Philadelphia left the station on track No. 1. While the train was passing through the switches in order to take its usual position for starting, the plaintiff unnecessarily, and without invitation from any one, went upon, the roadbed and was struck by the rear end of the train that was being backed dp. The undisputed testimony shows a clear case of contributory negligence on his part, and hence there was no error in refusing to take off the judgment of nonsuit. The case comes…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Irey v. Pennsylvania R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890