Legal Opinion

Muth v. Pennsylvania Railroad

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 5, 1930No. Appeal 207, 208 and 209PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Baldrige, J.,

The appellant maintains a produce yard containing thirteen tracks in the City of Pittsburgh. These tracks are in pairs with a space of about 24 feet on either side of each pair for vehicles to drive east and west for the purpose of loading and unloading cars. There is a crossing, 30 feet wide, running north and south over these tracks. A large amount of business is transacted daily in this yard as the produce is sold and delivered where the cars are spotted.

It appears under the plaintiffs ’ testimony that about 4:30 in the afternoon of March 12,1928, the A. B. Produce…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Kay v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
  2. Robb v. Niles-Bement-Pond Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  3. Thomas v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
  4. Frank v. Reading Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
  5. John v. Reick-Mcjunkin Dairy Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Reid v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
  2. Lawrence J. Sabo, Administrator of the Estate of James Scott, Jr., Deceased v. Reading Company, (Bethayres Concrete Products Company, Inc.)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1957

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API