O'Donnell v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.

95 A. 111, 249 Pa. 497, 1915 Pa. LEXIS 750
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 17, 1915·No. Appeal, No. 385·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The circumstances under which the husband of appellant was killed appear in the opinion of the court below directing judgment to be entered for the defendant non obstante veredicto. It is quite clear from the unquestioned facts summarized in that opinion that his death was due solely to the negligence of a coemployee, the hoisting engineer; and there is no merit in the contention of the appellant that the defendant company had imposed duties upon the engineer which prevented him, in the operation of his engine, from observing rules 18, 19, 20 and 42 prescribed by the Act of June 2,1891, P. L. 176.

Judgment affirmed.

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

O'Donnell v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co., 95 A. 111, 249 Pa. 497, 1915 Pa. LEXIS 750 (Pa. 1915).

95 A. 111 (O'Donnell v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lynott v. Scranton Coal Co.
112 A. 741 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1921)