Chilton v. Carbondale

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Chilton v. Carbondale

28 A. 833, 160 Pa. 463, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 830

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided March 26, 1894·No. Appeal, No. 176·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

We see no error in this case that requires us to reverse the judgment. The question of the plaintiff’s contributory neglir gence, upon the evidence,- was one for the jury. It was submitted in a- charge that was both fair and adequate, and the [466] jury has found that she was not guilty of negligence that contributed in any degree to the injury of which she complains'. Whether their conclusion is correct is not for us to consider. The question was for them, and it was properly left to them.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Per Curiam,

We see no error in this case that requires us to reverse the judgment. The question of the plaintiff’s contributory neglir gence, upon the evidence,- was one for the jury. It was submitted in a- charge that was both fair and adequate, and the [466] jury has found that she was not guilty of negligence that contributed in any degree to the injury of which she complains'. Whether their conclusion is correct is not for us to consider. The question was for them, and it was properly left to them.

The judgment is affirmed.

Chilton v. Carbondale, 28 A. 833, 160 Pa. 463, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 830 (Pa. 1894).

Pincite

28 A. 833 (Chilton v. Carbondale) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related