Haughney v. Mahanoy City Borough
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 221, Jan. T. 1919, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Schuylkill Co., Sept. T., 1916, No. 27, for defendant n. o. v., in case of Catharine Haughney v. Mahanoy City Borough. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Koch, J. At the trial the jury returned a verdict for plaintiff for $5,000. Subsequently the court entered judgment for defendant n. o. v. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned was in entering judgment for defendant n. o. v.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Chief Justice Brown,
Mahanoy City Borough is a populous town. Market or Water street runs through it from east to west, and Mahanoy creek flows along the middle of this street throughout its entire length. The creek — about sixteen feet wide — is from seven to eleven feet below the surface of the street, on each side of which there is a roadway about sixteen feet wide. On each side of the creek there is a retaining wall reaching almost to the surface of. the street, but there are no barriers or guards of any kind along these walls for the protection of pedestrians or travellers…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Robb v. Connellsville Bor.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- Sickels v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Corbalis v. Township of NewberrySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- Lumis v. Philadelphia Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Merriman v. Phillipsburg BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Lawrence v. Scranton CitySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Smith v. Shamokin BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Gardner v. Consolidated Rail Corp. SEPTASupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- Gardner v. Consolidated Rail Corp. SEPTASupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990