Linch v. Pittsburgh Traction Co.
25 A. 621, 153 Pa. 102, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1057
Opinion
Each of the defendant’s points referred to in the specifications of error involved a binding instruction in its favor. This the learned judge below could not have properly given in view of the evidence. We do not think it was a case that could have been withdrawn from the jury. A discussion of the evidence is unnecessary.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Linch v. Pittsburgh Traction Co., 25 A. 621, 153 Pa. 102, 1893 Pa. LEXIS 1057 (Pa. 1893).
25 A. 621 (Linch v. Pittsburgh Traction Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hunterson v. Union Traction Co.
55 A. 543 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1903)
Bensing v. Peoples Electric Street Railway Co.
9 Pa. Super. 142 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1898)
New Jersey Traction Co. v. Gardner
38 A. 669 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1897)
Mahar v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad
5 A.D. 22 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1896)