Legal Opinion · Dissent

Imes v. Empire Hook & Ladder Co.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 19, 1977No. 1649Published

1DissentPrice, Judge

The majority holds that “[a] motorist entering an intersection with a green light in his favor . . . does not have an affirmative duty as a matter of law, to continue looking after entering an intersection.” [247 Pa.Super. at 923, 372 A.2d at 923] I disagree with that statement. More importantly, I believe that a driver entering an intersection has a duty to continue attempting to look until he can see. Appellant’s uncontradicted testimony reveals that he did not discharge his duty in this case. Therefore, I would affirm the lower court’s grant of a compulsory nonsuit.

Buttonwood and Airy…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Byrne v. Schultz (Stone)Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  2. Lewis v. QuinnSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
  3. Smith v. United News Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  4. Jordan v. KennedySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  5. Koehler v. SchwartzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955

12 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