Neff v. Harrisburg Traction Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 24, May T., 1899, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Dauphin Co., Sept. T., 1898, No. 252, on verdict for plaintiff. Trespass for personal injuries.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 24, May T., 1899, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Dauphin Co., Sept. T., 1898, No. 252, on verdict for plaintiff. Trespass for personal injuries. Before Simonton, P. J. Separate actions were brought by the father and by the daughter for a broken arm suffered by the daughter while alighting from defendant’s car, November 15,1897. They were consolidated and tried together in accordance with the provisions of the Act of May 12, 1897, P. L. 62. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court and by the charge of the court below, which was in part as follows: You have to take…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Green,
On the trial of this case two witnesses examined for the defendant testified positively that Mable Neff and her sister left the car while it was in motion and before it stopped. She and her sister testified that they did not leave the car until it stopped, and that it started with a sudden jerk while they were getting off, and that this was the cause of Mable Neff’s fall. The witness, Lillian Adams, testified that the Neff girls got off while *505the car was moving, and that she herself did not get off till after the car stopped, and she then saw Mable Neff lying on…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- New York Etc. R. Co. v. EnchesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Victor v. Pennsylvania R. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1894