Crissey v. Hestonville, Mantua & Fairmount Passenger Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia: No. 184, to January Term 1872. This was an action on the ease, brought to December Term 1870 of the court below, by Edwin Crissey, by his next fr-iend, &c., against The Hestonville, Mantua and Fairmount Passenger Railway Company.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court of Philadelphia: No. 184, to January Term 1872. This was an action on the ease, brought to December Term 1870 of the court below, by Edwin Crissey, by his next fr-iend, &c., against The Hestonville, Mantua and Fairmount Passenger Railway Company. The cause of action alleged was the negligence of the defendants’ servants, by which the plaintiff, a hoy of about thirteen years of age, fell from one of their cars and was seriously hurt. , The case was tried May 5th 1871, before Thayer, J. The evidence was as follows :— The plaintiff testified: “ On the afternoon of…
1Opinion of the Court
*86The opinion of the court was delivered, January 26th 1874, by
Mercur, J.
The first assignment of error is not according to the rules. All the other assignments are to the charge of the court, and will be considered together. As a general rule a question of negligence must be submitted to the jury. It should be where there is any substantial doubt as to the facts, or to the inferences to be drawn from them: Pennsylvania R. R. Co. v. Barnett, 9 P. F. Smith 259; Johnson v. Bruner, 11 Id. 58; McKee v. Bidwell, 24 Id. 218.
There is no absolute rule as to what constitutes negligence. It is dependent…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Kelly v. Pittsburg & Birmingham Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Koenig v. FlahertySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
- Strawbridge v. Bradford, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1889
- Oklahoma Ry. Co. v. BolesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Wardle v. New Orleans City RailroadSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1883
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.