Legal Opinion · Dissent

Cinquina v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 15, 1949No. Appeal, 96Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion bt

Me. Justice Patterson:

It has long been the settled law of this Commonwealth that a pedestrian has an absolute duty to look for approaching trolley cars immediately before entering upon tlie car tracks and that failure to do so constitutes contributory negligence as a matter of law: Watson v. P. T. C., 356 Pa. 103, 106, 51 A. 2d 613. The fact that a pedestrian is proceeding under a favorable traffic signal does not relieve him of this duty. A green light at a traffic intersection offers but a qualified permission to proceed, and the pedestrian crossing in reliance upon it…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Dando v. BrobstSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  2. Flynn v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
  3. Patton v. GeorgeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
  4. Cunningham v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1913
  5. Weldon v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945

6 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