Charles Eneu Johnson Co. v. Philadelphia

87 A. 1119, 240 Pa. 552, 1913 Pa. LEXIS 713

Opinion

Per Curiam,

When this case was here before (236 Pa. 510), the judgment was reversed and a new trial ordered because the case had not been .tried on the proper theory, as was pointed out by Mr. Justice Elkin. On the last trial — resulting in the judgment now before us — the case was tried on the lines indicated in our former opinion as the proper ones, and we find nothing in the sixty-seven assignments of error which would justify a reversal and another opportunity to the City of Philadelphia to escape a liability which a second jury has placed upon it.

Judgment affirmed.