Karchner v. Pennsylvania Railroad
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 199, Jan. T., 1906, by-plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., Oct. T., 1903, No. 1,101, on verdict for defendant in case of Lloyd Karchner v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company. Trespass to recover damages for injuries to plaintiff’s land.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 199, Jan. T., 1906, by-plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., Oct. T., 1903, No. 1,101, on verdict for defendant in case of Lloyd Karchner v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company. Trespass to recover damages for injuries to plaintiff’s land. Before Ferris, J. At the trial it appeared that plaintiff’s land was situated along the Nescopeck creek, and that the floods which did the injury occurred in December of 1901 and February and March of 1902. ’ The evidence showed that these floods were of an extraordinary character, and that nothing like them had taken place for many years.…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
In charging the jury the learned judge said “. . . . the *310question here is, was the defendant, within six years prior to the injury, guilty of any negligence which was the producing cause of the injuries complained of, either solely or in connection with, and so operating together -with, the flood of 1901 or 1902, as the case may be ? The rule of law in that connection is, that if the sole cause of the injury was an extraordinary flood the defendant company is not liable, and it can be held liable only in case some negligent conduct on its part, the natural consequences of which…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Miskel v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Brown v. Chicago, B. & Q. R.District Court, D. Nebraska · 1912
- Eikland v. CaseyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1920