Rudgeair v. Reading Traction Co.
This text of 36 A. 859 (Rudgeair v. Reading 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 testimony offered in this case shows that plaintiff was [338]*338assaulted on the street and beaten by John Yan Reed, an employee of the Traction Company, defendant; but it clearly appears that in tb e commission of the assault and battery Yan Reed was not acting within the scope of his employment as a motorman of the company, or by the authority or direction of any of its officers or agents. The principle, respondeat superior, has no application to such a purely personal trespass as that disclosed by the evidence prepared. The court was therefore clearly right in refusing to take off the nonsuit.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
36 A. 859, 180 Pa. 333, 1897 Pa. LEXIS 925, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rudgeair-v-reading-traction-co-pa-1897.