Madara v. Pottsville Iron & Steel Co.

28 A. 639, 160 Pa. 109, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 776
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedFebruary 26, 1894
DocketAppeal, No. 249
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 28 A. 639 (Madara v. Pottsville Iron & Steel 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.

Bluebook
Madara v. Pottsville Iron & Steel Co., 28 A. 639, 160 Pa. 109, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 776 (Pa. 1894).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This case involves questions of fact which were necessarily for the consideration of the jury, and they were fairly submitted to them by the learned trial judge in a clear and able charge, which appears to be free from any error of which the defendant has any reason to complain. The jury must have found that the deceased sustained the fatal injury in consequence of the negligence of defendant company, and that neither he nor his father was guilty of any negligence that contributed thereto. The testimony was quite sufficient to warrant them in so finding. There is nothing in either of the specifications of error that requires special notice.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Hollis v. Widener
70 A. 287 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1908)
Burns v. Windfall Manufacturing Co.
45 N.E. 188 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1896)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
28 A. 639, 160 Pa. 109, 1894 Pa. LEXIS 776, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/madara-v-pottsville-iron-steel-co-pa-1894.