Sturzebecker v. Inland Traction Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 159, Jan. T., 1904, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Montgomery Co., June T., 1903, No. 11, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of Annie H. Sturzebecker v. The Inland Traction Company and The Philadelphia and Lehigh Valley Traction Company. Trespass to recover damages for injuries to land. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. JError assigned was refusal to take off nonsuit.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Potter,
Two defendants, The Inland Traction Company and The Philadelphia and Lehigh Valley Traction Company, were here sued as joint tort feasors. The statement alleges that The Inland Traction Company located and constructed a trolley railway in front of and over the lands of the plaintiff, and ‘‘ about the time of the said construction, leased to or in some other manner unknown to the plaintiff, merged with the said defendant The Philadelphia and Lehigh Valley Traction Company, and thereafter by virtue of said merger, operated the said railway.”
The plaintiff complains…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Wiest v. Electric Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Dutton v. Lansdowne BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
- Minnich v. Lancaster & Lititz Electric Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Rowland v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Howard v. Union Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Cleary v. Quaker City Cab Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Moehlenbrock v. Parke, Davis & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1918
- United Societies of Greek Catholic Religion of U. S. v. KlochakSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1940
- Polis v. HeizmannSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
- Hill v. American Stores Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.