Corcoran v. Wanamaker

39 A. 1108, 185 Pa. 496, 1898 Pa. LEXIS 741
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided April 11, 1898·No. Appeal, No. 12·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Pee Curiam,

There is no evidence that the defendants had any knowledge that the use of the acids complained of would produce the disease from which the plaintiff suffered, and there was no proof that it was not customary to use acids in laundries in the same manner and proportions as they were used in the laundry business conducted by the- defendants. The case was therefore destitute of the evidence necessary to establish the charge of negligence without which there could be no recovery.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Corcoran v. Wanamaker, 39 A. 1108, 185 Pa. 496, 1898 Pa. LEXIS 741 (Pa. 1898).

39 A. 1108 (Corcoran v. Wanamaker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Faulks v. Fischer
37 A.2d 574 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1944)
Grammer v. Mid-Continent Petroleum Corporation
71 F.2d 38 (Tenth Circuit, 1934)
Voshall v. Northern Pacific Terminal Co.
240 P. 891 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1925)
Miller v. American Steel & Wire Co.
97 A. 345 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1916)
Canfield v. Iowa Dairy Separator Co.
172 Iowa 164 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1915)
Pecos & N. T. Ry. Co. v. Collins
173 S.W. 250 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1915)
Levy v. Rosenblatt
21 Pa. Super. 543 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1902)