Fennell v. Harris
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 168, Jan. Term, 1897, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Pbila. County, Dec. Term, 1895, No. 126, refusing to take off nonsuit. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Brégy, J. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. The court entered a compulsory nonsuit which it subsequently refused to take off. Error assigned was refusal to take off nonsuit.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb.. Justice Williams,
This appeal presents a very close, question. It is whether the facts shown by the testimony on the part of the plaintiff are of such a character as to justify the court below in pronouncing upon their effect as a matter of law, or whether they should have been submitted to the jury as raising a question of fact for their decision. The distinction between the functions of the court and the jury is, in a general way, quite clear, but cases are sometimes encountered, and this seems to be one of them, in which the practical application of the distinction to the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Davidson v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
3Cited by3 opinions
- Siever v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- McCarthy v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Ihrig v. Erie RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904