Mullen v. Wilkes-Barre Gas & Electric Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 209, Jan. T., 1909, by defendant, from judgment of the Superior Court, No. 52, March T., 1908, affirming judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., Oct. T., 1905, No. 530, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Edmund Mullen, by his father and next friend, Festus Mullen, and said Festus Mullen, each in his own right, v. Wilkes-Barre Gas & Electric Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Lynch, P. J.;'see 38 Pa.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 209, Jan. T., 1909, by defendant, from judgment of the Superior Court, No. 52, March T., 1908, affirming judgment of C. P. Luzerne Co., Oct. T., 1905, No. 530, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Edmund Mullen, by his father and next friend, Festus Mullen, and said Festus Mullen, each in his own right, v. Wilkes-Barre Gas & Electric Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Lynch, P. J.;'see 38 Pa. Superior Ct. 3. The facts appear in the opinion of the Superior Court, by Head, J., as follows: The defendant corporation was engaged in furnishing electric…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
On the main question presented by this appeal, whether danger to anyone was reasonably to be apprehended because of the condition of the defendant’s wire the case is admittedly close, but in the opinion of a majority of the court the judgment should be affirmed for the reasons stated in the opinion of Judge Head of the Superior Court.
The judgment is affirmed.
2Cited by27 opinions
- Alabama Power Company v. TaylorSupreme Court of Alabama · 1975
- Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. v. FlippoCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1998
- Stark v. HoltzclawSupreme Court of Florida · 1925
- Town of Clinton v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1943
- Brillhart v. Edison Light & Power Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.