Gumbert v. Wood

Alleghany County Court of Common Pleas

Gumbert v. Wood

23 A. 404, 146 Pa. 370, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1232

CourtPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County

DecidedJanuary 4, 1892

DocketNo. 91

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 23 A. 404 (Gumbert v. Wood) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gumbert v. Wood, 23 A. 404, 146 Pa. 370, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1232 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

Per, Curiam :

"We see no error in the answer of the learned judge below to the plaintiffs’ second point. We think it needs no argument to show that the defendant had no right to destroy the coal boat of the plaintiffs, merely in the general interest of navigation. But if its location was such as to so obstruct navigation that the defendant could not pass it without seriously endangering the safety of his own property, he had the right to remove such obstruction. Nor do we find error in the answer to plaintiffs’ third point. The learned judge properly left it for the jury to find whether the defendant should have double-tripped under all the circumstances. It was for them to determine the question of necessity. It would have been clear error for the learned judge to have affirmed the defendant’s point, and withdrawn the case from the jury.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per, Curiam :

"We see no error in the answer of the learned judge below to the plaintiffs’ second point. We think it needs no argument to show that the defendant had no right to destroy the coal boat of the plaintiffs, merely in the general interest of navigation. But if its location was such as to so obstruct navigation that the defendant could not pass it without seriously endangering the safety of his own property, he had the right to remove such obstruction. Nor do we find error in the answer to plaintiffs’ third point. The learned judge properly left it for the jury to find whether the defendant should have double-tripped under all the circumstances. It was for them to determine the question of necessity. It would have been clear error for the learned judge to have affirmed the defendant’s point, and withdrawn the case from the jury.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A. 404, 146 Pa. 370, 1892 Pa. LEXIS 1232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gumbert-v-wood-pactcomplallegh-1892.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack