Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1900

Foreman v. Pennsylvania Railroad

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Decided April 30, 1900 · Brown, Collum, Cubjam, Dean, Green, Mkstrezat

195 Pa. 499; 46 A. 109; 1900 Pa. LEXIS 676

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Yarrington v. Delaware & Hudson Co. (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Middle Pennsylvania 1906)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Pee Cubjam,

The present case is identical in character with the ease of Price v. Penna R. Co., 96 Pa. 256, and is ruled by it. We have no desire or intention to overrule that decision. The contention that there ought to have been a signal at the switch and therefore the defendant was guilty of negligence, is not tenable, as there was no evidence that the absence of a signal caused the' *502accident or in any way contributed to it and there was an abundance of proof that the switch was a standard lever switch * in general use along the whole line of this branch road. The charge of the court below was a correct presentation of the case, and the binding instruction to the jury to find for the defendant was in conformity with the evidence and the law.

Judgment affirmed.

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