Keiper v. Marquart
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Concurrence
Concurring Opinion by
Montgomery, J.:
I concur in the decision of the Court in this case solely on the basis that defendant exercised no control over the property. However, I do not agree with the majority opinion in its finding that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent as a matter of law. The danger being only intermittent and of such nature that use of that part of the cellar area might be made with proper care, it would be for the jury to determine plaintiff’s lack of care. Morris v. Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, 384 Pa. 464, 121 A. 2d 135; Denver v. Sharpless, 191 Pa. Superior Ct.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Morris v. Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
- Starr v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
- Denver v. SharplessSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1960