Williams v. D'Amico
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Williams v. D'Amico, 78 Pa. Super. 575 (1922)
1922 Pa. Super. LEXIS 162
Head, Henderson, Keller, Linn, Orlady, Porter, Trexler
Williams v. D'Amico
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff recovered a verdict based on the jury’s finding, that the defendant had negligently operated his automobile on a public highway, causing it to collide with and injure the plaintiff’s car. There was ample evidence to justify the conclusion reached by the jury, that the defendant was negligently responsible for the collision. The opinion of the trial judge in discharging a rule for a new trial, and one for judgment non obstante veredicto, is a sufficient answer to the appellant’s argument on this appeal. See also Stubb v. Edwards, 260 Pa. 75. For the reasons given in the opinion of the trial judge, the assignments of error are overruled, and the judgment is affirmed.
Reference
- Cited By
- 8 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Negligence — Automobiles—Ownership—Registration Question for jury. In an action to recover damages resulting from an automobile accident, the question of ownership of the damaged machine is one of fact to be decided by the jury. The fact that the plaintiff’s automobile was not registered in his name, as required by law, and carried license numbers issued to a former owner, does not prevent a recovery, if the plaintiff was found by the jury to be the real owner of the car. Violation of a statute does not defeat the right to recover damages for injuries, unless it be the efficient cause of the injury. In an action to recover damages for injuries to an automobile, the case is for the jury and a verdict for the plaintiff will be sustained, where the evidence established that the collision took place when the defendant was racing with a third car along a public highway.