Ford v. Knipe

36 A. 729, 180 Pa. 210, 1897 Pa. LEXIS 905
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedFebruary 22, 1897
DocketAppeal, No. 555
StatusPublished

This text of 36 A. 729 (Ford v. Knipe) 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
Ford v. Knipe, 36 A. 729, 180 Pa. 210, 1897 Pa. LEXIS 905 (Pa. 1897).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The question whether or not the bursting of the burr stone was due to any negligence of the defendant was, of course, a question of pure fact. It was exclusively within the province of the jury to decide it, if there was any evidence more than a scintilla, in the cause. There was evidence both as to the condition of the engine and governor, and the running both of the burr stones and the engine which was claimed to prove negligence. We cannot say as matter of law that this evidence was no proof whatever on this subject. That could only be determined by the jury as a matter of fact. The question was carefully and correctly submitted to the jury by the learned court below, and we cannot say that this action of the court was erroneous.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
36 A. 729, 180 Pa. 210, 1897 Pa. LEXIS 905, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ford-v-knipe-pa-1897.