Cannon v. Blatt

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Cannon v. Blatt

20 A.2d 293, 342 Pa. 303, 1941 Pa. LEXIS 522

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMay 12, 1941

DocketAppeal, 201

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 20 A.2d 293 (Cannon v. Blatt) 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

Cannon v. Blatt, 20 A.2d 293, 342 Pa. 303, 1941 Pa. LEXIS 522 (Pa. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curíam,

This is an action of- trespass to recover damages for injuries- sustained by the wife plaintiff. -■ Prom the judgment entered on a directed verdict in defendant’s favor,' plaintiffs appeal.

For more than a year prior to the accident, plaintiffs had lived, as tenants, in an apartment on the second floor front of a building owned by defendant. There was a bathroom in. the, center of the. .second. floor for the use of the plaintiffs and other tenants on that floor. To reach .the bathroom, from plaintiffs’ apartment, it was necessary to walk along a hallway and descend two steps. ,At about 6:30 p. m. on the night in question, the wife plaintiff left her apartment to go to the bathroom. The electric light in the hall was out; She testified she was in a rush to get to the bathroom. As it was pot very light outside, she lit a candle, which went out when she closed the door. Without relighting it, she proceeded by feeling along the Avail with her hand. She said she did not.realize she.was so near the steps, and fell when she came to them and was injured. She admitted familiarity with the-nature of.the hall and said that .it was so dark she was unable; to see anything.

Under this showing, the trial judge properly directed a verdict for defendant on the ground that plaintiff was eontributorily negligent:. Conboy v. Osage Tribe No. 113, 288. Pa. 193, 135 A. .729; Hoffner v. Bergdoll, 309 Pa. 558, 164 A. 607; Fayy v. 900 North 63rd St. Corp., 137 Pa. Superior Ct. 496, 9 A. 483.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curíam,

This is an action of- trespass to recover damages for injuries- sustained by the wife plaintiff. -■ Prom the judgment entered on a directed verdict in defendant’s favor,' plaintiffs appeal.

For more than a year prior to the accident, plaintiffs had lived, as tenants, in an apartment on the second floor front of a building owned by defendant. There was a bathroom in. the, center of the. .second. floor for the use of the plaintiffs and other tenants on that floor. To reach .the bathroom, from plaintiffs’ apartment, it was necessary to walk along a hallway and descend two steps. ,At about 6:30 p. m. on the night in question, the wife plaintiff left her apartment to go to the bathroom. The electric light in the hall was out; She testified she was in a rush to get to the bathroom. As it was pot very light outside, she lit a candle, which went out when she closed the door. Without relighting it, she proceeded by feeling along the Avail with her hand. She said she did not.realize she.was so near the steps, and fell when she came to them and was injured. She admitted familiarity with the-nature of.the hall and said that .it was so dark she was unable; to see anything.

Under this showing, the trial judge properly directed a verdict for defendant on the ground that plaintiff was eontributorily negligent:. Conboy v. Osage Tribe No. 113, 288. Pa. 193, 135 A. .729; Hoffner v. Bergdoll, 309 Pa. 558, 164 A. 607; Fayy v. 900 North 63rd St. Corp., 137 Pa. Superior Ct. 496, 9 A. 483.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.2d 293, 342 Pa. 303, 1941 Pa. LEXIS 522, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cannon-v-blatt-pa-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack