Duff v. Allegheny Valley Railroad
Opinion
The judgment of the Supreme Court was entered
This was an action by a parent to recover damages for the death of her son on account of the alleged negligence of the defendants. It is clear, from the evidence, that the boy was on the train from day to day, not as a passenger or employee of the company, but by the connivance of the conductor, in order to sell newspapers. It is not like a person allowed by the conductor to ride in a car as a passenger without paying fare. In that case [462]*462there is a legal liability to the company for the fare. This is the case of a mere trespasser, and the company owed him no duty. We are of opinion that the rulings of the learned judge below were right.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
91 Pa. 458 (Duff v. Allegheny Valley Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.