Zurn v. Tetlow
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
APPEAL BY PLAINTIEE EROM THE COURT OE COMMON PLEAS NO. 3 OE PHILADELPHIA COUNTY. No. 192 January Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 70 June Term 1887, C. P. No. 3. On May 12, 1887, Harry J. Zurn, by his mother and next friend, Mary Zurn, brought trespass for negligence against William Tetlow. Issue. At the trial on October 10, 1888, a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff for $3,500. Subsequently, a rule for a new trial was made absolute.
Read the full summary
APPEAL BY PLAINTIEE EROM THE COURT OE COMMON PLEAS NO. 3 OE PHILADELPHIA COUNTY. No. 192 January Term 1890, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 70 June Term 1887, C. P. No. 3. On May 12, 1887, Harry J. Zurn, by his mother and next friend, Mary Zurn, brought trespass for negligence against William Tetlow. Issue. At the trial on October 10, 1888, a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff for $3,500. Subsequently, a rule for a new trial was made absolute. At the second trial on April 17, 1889, it was made to appear that in August, 1886, the plaintiff, being then a little over fourteen years of age,…
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Ctjeiam:
An examination of the evidence has not convinced us that there was any error in refusing to submit the case to the jury. There is nothing in the testimony that would have' warranted them in finding that the injury complained of was the result of defendant’s negligence. There was therefore no error in refusing to take off the judgment of nonsuit.
As remarked by the learned president of the Common Pleas, the machine itself was not dangerous, and therefore no special instructions, as to the manner of using it, were required; but, if it had been otherwise, the undisputed evidence shows…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rummel v. Dilworth, Porter & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
3Cited by3 opinions
- Tagg v. McGeorgeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Fisher v. Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Melchert v. Smith Brewing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891