Legal Opinion

Struse v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 30, 1925No. Appeal 246PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opihioit by

Trexler, J.,

The plaintiffs’ driver placed their truck, loaded with cement upon the street car tracks of the defendant company, thus blocking them. The cement was intended for the parties who had the contract for the paving of the street. Before the driver backed the truck across the tracks, he had waited about ten minutes for a car to pass, so ¡as not to unnecessarily obstruct the car line. He saw a car approach two blocks away, and before he could get out of the way the car struck the truck. The truck had been placed at such an angle as to conveniently deliver the cement to the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mish v. WoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1859
  2. Specktor v. Victory Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Rothweiler v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  2. Drake v. EmhoffSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
  3. Rothberg v. Phila. R. T. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  4. Snyder v. Harrisburg Railways Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  5. Glassman v. P. R. T. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933

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

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

Powered by the Exa API