Nolder v. McKeesport, Wilmerding & Duquense Railway Co.

50 A. 948, 201 Pa. 169, 1902 Pa. LEXIS 796
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJanuary 6, 1902
DocketAppeal, Nos. 46 and 47
StatusPublished

This text of 50 A. 948 (Nolder v. McKeesport, Wilmerding & Duquense Railway 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
Nolder v. McKeesport, Wilmerding & Duquense Railway Co., 50 A. 948, 201 Pa. 169, 1902 Pa. LEXIS 796 (Pa. 1902).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

No error was committed by the court in the submission of the case to the jury. There was evidence showing that the car was moving at an unusual rate of speed. The motorman referring to it on cross-examination said, “We were going at the rate that full power takes us,” “ and were going as fast as the car could go.” There was also testimony showing that the child started to cross the street when the car was at least 100 feet away and when she was in plain view of the motorman who could readily have seen her in time to have stopped the car. See Kroesen v. New Castle Electric St. Ry. Co., 198 Pa. 26.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Kroesen v. New Castle Electric Street Railway Co.
47 A. 850 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1901)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
50 A. 948, 201 Pa. 169, 1902 Pa. LEXIS 796, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nolder-v-mckeesport-wilmerding-duquense-railway-co-pa-1902.