Timler v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 172, Jan. T., 1905, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. No. 5, Phila. Co., June T., 1903, No. 4,463, on verdict for defendant in case of Herman Timler v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Davis, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. The court gave binding instructions for defendant. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned was in giving binding instructions for defendant.
1DissentJustice Mestrezat
The learned trial judge held that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence and on that ground directed a compulsory nonsuit. The plaintiff and another witness were called in his behalf. It was admitted, however, on the record that fourteen other witnesses would corroborate the evidence given by the two witnesses who testified.
The facts are not in dispute. About 8 o’clock on the evening of July 11, 1903, Timler, the plaintiff, drove a one horse bottling wagon east along the south side of Clearfield street, which runs almost east and west. This street opens into Kensington avenue on…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Callahan v. Philadelphia Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1898
- Haas v. Chester Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902