Darwood v. Union Traction Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Darwood v. Union Traction Co.

42 A. 290, 189 Pa. 592, 1899 Pa. LEXIS 699

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJanuary 30, 1899

DocketAppeal, No. 117

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 42 A. 290 (Darwood v. Union Traction 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

Darwood v. Union Traction Co., 42 A. 290, 189 Pa. 592, 1899 Pa. LEXIS 699 (Pa. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

On the trial in the court below the defendant offered no testimony, and consequently the case was disposed of solely on plaintiff’s evidence, part of which tended to prove that defendant was guilty of negligence in carelessly running its car at an unsafe rate of speed, etc. This, without more, would have necessitated submission of the case to the jury; but it also appeared by undisputed evidence that the plaintiff himself was guilty of negligence which contributed to his injury. In view of this undisputed fact, the learned trial judge rightly held that plaintiff could not recover and, accordingly, directed the jury to find for the defendant. The evidence of plaintiff’s contributory negligence was such that a verdict in plaintiff’s favor was unwarranted, and, if found, could not have been sustained. It, therefore, follows that there was no error in directing the jury to find for the defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam,

On the trial in the court below the defendant offered no testimony, and consequently the case was disposed of solely on plaintiff’s evidence, part of which tended to prove that defendant was guilty of negligence in carelessly running its car at an unsafe rate of speed, etc. This, without more, would have necessitated submission of the case to the jury; but it also appeared by undisputed evidence that the plaintiff himself was guilty of negligence which contributed to his injury. In view of this undisputed fact, the learned trial judge rightly held that plaintiff could not recover and, accordingly, directed the jury to find for the defendant. The evidence of plaintiff’s contributory negligence was such that a verdict in plaintiff’s favor was unwarranted, and, if found, could not have been sustained. It, therefore, follows that there was no error in directing the jury to find for the defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 A. 290, 189 Pa. 592, 1899 Pa. LEXIS 699, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darwood-v-union-traction-co-pa-1899.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack