Kannenberg v. Conestoga Traction Co.
This text of 64 A. 680 (Kannenberg v. Conestoga 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.
Opinion
The plaintiff was riding in a closed laundry wagon going in the direction in which the cars ran, and the only precaution he took before crossing the tracks was to stop and look back when twenty-five or thirty feet from the crossing. He then drove on slowly and without looking again turned across the tracks, and was struck by a car which he could have seen if he had looked again before turning or when at the edge of the tracks. He disregarded a duty established by an unbroken line of decisions on the subject extending from Ehrisman v. East Harrisburg City Pass. Railway Co., 150 Pa. 180, to Moser v. Union Traction Co., 205 Pa. 481.
The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
64 A. 680, 215 Pa. 555, 1906 Pa. LEXIS 846, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kannenberg-v-conestoga-traction-co-pa-1906.