Legal Opinion

Harte v. Jones

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 3, 1926No. Appeal, 160PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion-by

Mr. Justice Kephart,

Appellant sued to recover damage from the landlord for an injury received on the premises. At common law, subject to certain exceptions, the occupier or tenant and not the landlord was liable for injuries occurring to a third person on or off the premises: Wolk v. Pittsburgh Hotels Company, 284 Pa. 545, 550. We held in Schott v. Harvey, 105 Pa. 222, that a tenant in possession is practically the owner of the property. If the building afterwards became dangerous in law, the owner was not liable for an injury occurring thereon. The same rule obtains where the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Brown v. WhiteSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
  2. Schott v. HarveySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
  3. Wolk v. Pittsburgh Hotels Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  4. Fehlhauer v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
  5. Kirchner v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Harris (Et Ux.) v. Lewistown Tr. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
  2. Reitmeyer v. SprecherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  3. Toth v. PhiladelphiaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  4. Fisher Et Ux. v. City of Phila.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
  5. Philadelphia v. Merchant & Evans Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929

17 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