Corcoran v. Wanamaker

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania April 11, 1898

Corcoran v. Wanamaker, 185 Pa. 496 (Pa. 1898)

39 A. 1108; 1898 Pa. LEXIS 741

Dean, Fell, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Pee

Opinion of the Court

Pee Curiam,

There is no evidence that the defendants had any knowledge that the use of the acids complained of would produce the disease from which the plaintiff suffered, and there was no proof that it was not customary to use acids in laundries in the same manner and proportions as they were used in the laundry business conducted by the- defendants. The case was therefore destitute of the evidence necessary to establish the charge of negligence without which there could be no recovery.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: Julia Corcoran v. John Wanamaker, Thomas B. Wanamaker and Robert C. Ogden, trading as John Wanamaker
Cited By: 9 cases
Status: Published
Syllabus: Negligence — Use of acids in laundry — Evidence—Nonsuit. In an action against the proprietors of a laundry by an employee to recover damages for loss of eyesight alleged to have been caused by fumes created by the use of acids, a nonsuit is properly entered where there is no evidence that the defendants had any knowledge that the use of the acids complained of would produce the disease from which the plaintiff suffered, and there is no proof that it was not customary to use acids in laundries in the same manner and proportions as they were used in the laundry business conducted by the defendants.