Caddy v. Harleigh-Brookwood Coal Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Caddy v. Harleigh-Brookwood Coal Co.

103 A. 1016, 261 Pa. 20, 1918 Pa. LEXIS 679

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMarch 18, 1918

DocketAppeal, No. 329

StatusPublished

This text of 103 A. 1016 (Caddy v. Harleigh-Brookwood Coal Co.) 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

Caddy v. Harleigh-Brookwood Coal Co., 103 A. 1016, 261 Pa. 20, 1918 Pa. LEXIS 679 (Pa. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The judgment for the defendant, non obstante veredicto', is affirmed on the following from the opinion of the judge, specially presiding, directing it to be entered: “Granting, for the purposes of this argument, that the testimony adduced warranted the finding by the jury that the defendant, in permitting the charged wires to remain exposed and uninsulated for a period of two months, failed to exercise due care under the circumstances, and that the deceased was not guilty of contributory negligence, nevertheless we are of the opinion that the plaintiff failed to show that the defendant’s negligence was the cause of her husband’s death or that he died from electric shock.”

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam,

The judgment for the defendant, non obstante veredicto', is affirmed on the following from the opinion of the judge, specially presiding, directing it to be entered: “Granting, for the purposes of this argument, that the testimony adduced warranted the finding by the jury that the defendant, in permitting the charged wires to remain exposed and uninsulated for a period of two months, failed to exercise due care under the circumstances, and that the deceased was not guilty of contributory negligence, nevertheless we are of the opinion that the plaintiff failed to show that the defendant’s negligence was the cause of her husband’s death or that he died from electric shock.”

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 A. 1016, 261 Pa. 20, 1918 Pa. LEXIS 679, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/caddy-v-harleigh-brookwood-coal-co-pa-1918.