Ziserman v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.

88 A. 80, 241 Pa. 13, 1913 Pa. LEXIS 728
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 5, 1913·No. Appeal, No. 96·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The first, second, third and fourth assignments of error cannot be considered, as no exception was taken to the charge: Lindsay v. Dutton, 227 Pa. 208. Plaintiff’s sixth point was properly refused. The duty that rested upon the defendant was the exercise of due care under the circumstances — not greater than they required.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Ziserman v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co., 88 A. 80, 241 Pa. 13, 1913 Pa. LEXIS 728 (Pa. 1913).

88 A. 80 (Ziserman v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lindsay v. Dutton
75 A. 1096 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1910)