Legal Opinion

Lindner v. Friedel

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 1, 1964No. Appeals, 16 and 44PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Musmanno,

Gary Lindner, 6½ years of age, was crossing, between intersections, a street in Pittsburgh when he was struck by an automobile belonging to the defendant. The defendant had an unobstructed view of the street ahead of him and was 240 feet away from the child when the latter started across the street. It was a clear day. No possible reason could be advanced for failure on the part of the defendant to see the boy ahead of him. Nor did the defendant take the stand to explain why his vision did not catch the child in his path. The accident occurred in the vicinity of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Schneider v. SheldonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1955

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Smith v. ChardakSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. O'Neil v. O'NeilSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
  3. Fama v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Imbrescia v. Charleroi Borough AuthoritySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  5. Defulio v. Spectaguard, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1995

2 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