Hendrickson v. Chester City

70 A. 552, 221 Pa. 120, 1908 Pa. LEXIS 444
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 4, 1908·No. Appeal, No. 326·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

■- It was not shown that the place of the accident was essentially or continuously dangerous, though it might become so from’time to time when the ice melted in the day and froze in [121] the night. There was no accumulation of ice or snow that remained there all the time. This resulted in a temporary and changeable condition dependent on the variation of the weather and it appeared that on the day preceding the evening of the accident the ice had melted and the street was clear. The learned judge was of opinion that the most that was shown “ was a general slippery condition of the street which occurs in all cities in winter time*” We have not been convinced that this was an erroneous view.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Hendrickson v. Chester City, 70 A. 552, 221 Pa. 120, 1908 Pa. LEXIS 444 (Pa. 1908).

70 A. 552 (Hendrickson v. Chester City) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Solinsky v. Wilkes-Barre
99 A.2d 570 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1953)
Ross v. Pennsylvania Railroad
49 A.2d 370 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1946)
Coyle v. New Kensington
9 A.2d 405 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1939)
McDonough v. Munhall Borough
200 A. 638 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1938)
Bailey v. Oil City
157 A. 486 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1931)
Hincken v. Beechview Borough
50 Pa. Super. 540 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1912)
Eigenbrodt v. Williamsport
44 Pa. Super. 437 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1910)