Fegley v. Lycoming Rubber Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 304, Jan. T., 1910, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Lycoming Co., Sept. T., 1909, No. 269, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Samuel Fegley v. Lycoming Rubber Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal' injuries. Before Hart, P. J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $2,500. Defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Potter,
That the defendant in this case was negligent in failing to cover certain cogwheels, as required by the statute; that this negligence caused the injury to plaintiff, and that the latter was free from contributory negligence, are *448matters of fact which have all been established by the verdict of the jury. Counsel for appellant make no complaint of the manner in which the case was submitted to the jury, but they contend that the act of defendant in maintaining the open cogwheels, was not the proximate cause of the injury to the plaintiff. It seems that at the time of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Jones v. American Caramel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Elliott v. Allegheny County Light Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Valjago v. Carnegie Steel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
3Cited by20 opinions
- Francis C. O'Neill and Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. United States v. Ambrose-Augusterfer Corporation, Third-Party Francis C. O'NeillCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1969
- Plazak v. Allegheny Steel CompanySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1936
- Billo v. Allegheny Steel CompanySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1937
- Hines v. SweeneyWyoming Supreme Court · 1921
- Fortney v. BreonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.