Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1916

Long v. St. Clair Borough

Long v. St. Clair Borough
Court of Appeals of Oregon · Decided March 20, 1916 · Brown, Frazer, Mestrezat, Potter, Walling
253 Pa. 92; 97 A. 931; 1916 Pa. LEXIS 788
Long v. St. Clair Borough

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

Under the evidence presented by the plaintiff there was a presumption that the defendant had been negligent: Alexander v. Nanticoke Light Co., 209 Pa. 571; Delahunt v. United Telephone & Telegraph Co., 215 Pa. 241; and this presumption was not so clearly overcome that the defendant’s point asking that a verdict be directed in its favor ought to have been affirmed. Nothing in the assignments o£ error calls for a retrial of the case, and the judgment is, therefore, affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.