Ansell v. Philadelphia

120 A. 277, 276 Pa. 370, 1923 Pa. LEXIS 596
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedFebruary 12, 1923
DocketAppeal, No. 176
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 120 A. 277 (Ansell v. Philadelphia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ansell v. Philadelphia, 120 A. 277, 276 Pa. 370, 1923 Pa. LEXIS 596 (Pa. 1923).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Plaintiff’s son, when within one month of fourteen years of age, was drowned by falling into a pond of water, formed by the filling, from springs and other sources, of an abandoned quarry, on land of the city taken for park purposes. A used roadway, which ran the length of the body of water, was fenced off by a two-rail fence; but the boy crossed this barrier, and, when playing with his dog, met with the unfortunate accident which caused his death. The court below entered a non-suit, which it subsequently refused to remove, and this appeal followed.

We are not convinced of error; a pond, artificial or otherwise, does not differ from lakes and streams found everywhere, all of which are attractive to children and present common dangers. The owner of premises containing something attractive to children is not always liable in damages because of injuries to one yielding to the attraction; it depends upon the character of the thing in question, and a pond of water, guarded from the roadway like the one under consideration, cannot properly be placed in the same category with dangerous machines, electrical appliances and similar things. We agree with the learned court below that, on the facts here presented, the city was not guilty of actionable negligence. The nonsuit was properly entered.

The order appealed from is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

G.W.E. v. R.E.Z.
77 A.3d 43 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2013)
Cooper v. Reading
140 A.2d 792 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1958)
Menneti v. Evans Construction Co.
160 F. Supp. 372 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1958)
White v. Kanawha City Co.
34 S.E.2d 17 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1945)
Williams v. Overly Manufacturing Co.
34 A.2d 52 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1943)
Murdock Et Ux. v. Pa. Railroad Co.
27 A.2d 405 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1941)
Dolena v. Pittsburgh Terminal Coal Co.
188 A. 112 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1936)
Wheeler v. City of St. Helens
58 P.2d 501 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1936)
McCallister Et Ux. v. Homestead Boro.
185 A. 583 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1936)
Dornick Et Ux. v. Wierton C. Co.
167 A. 617 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1933)
Brown v. Scranton
169 A. 435 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1933)
Fiel v. City of Racine
233 N.W. 611 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1930)
Raeside v. City of Sioux City
229 N.W. 216 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1930)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
120 A. 277, 276 Pa. 370, 1923 Pa. LEXIS 596, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ansell-v-philadelphia-pa-1923.