Wellman v. Borough of Susquehanna Depot
Wellman v. Borough of Susquehanna Depot
Opinion of the Court
It is not alleged that there was any error in the admission or rejection of evidence. In view of the testimony properly before the jury, the case involved the questions of defendant’s negligence and the alleged contributory negligence of the plaintiff. Both of these controlling questions of fact were for the exclusive consideration of the jury, and to them they were fairly submitted in a clear, concise and fully adequate charge, to which no just exception can be taken. The verdict in favor of plaintiff is necessarily predicated of a finding, in his favor, of every material fact. The record discloses no error that would justify us in disturbing the verdict. There is nothing in either of the specifications of error that requires special comment.
The ease was ably and correctly tried, and the judgment is affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- David Wellman v. Borough of Susquehanna Depot
- Cited By
- 4 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Negligence — Borough—Road—Imperfectly guarded embankment. In an action against a borough to recover damages for personal injuries caused by the horse which plaintiff was driving taking fright at a locomotive and running over an embankment, the question of defendant’s negligence is -for the jury where the evidence tends to show that at the place where the accident occurred there was a steep perpendicular bank at the side of the road, extending, about twenty-eight feet above the railroad tracks below, and about fifty-six feet distant from the tracks, and that there were no guards or barriers along the road. Where there is evidence that if plaintiff had gone a short distance out of his way, he could have traveled to his home by a road which he knew to be safe, while he knew that the road which he did take was a dangerous one, the question of plaintiff’s contributory negligence was for the jury.