Reynolds v. Philadelphia

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Reynolds v. Philadelphia, 221 Pa. 51 (Pa. 1908)
70 A. 125; 1908 Pa. LEXIS 432
Brown, Elkin, Mestrezat, Mitchell, Pell, Potter, Stewart

Reynolds v. Philadelphia

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

The plaintiff, walking at night along Diamond street, stepped into a hole or depression, apparently the cover of a water box which had sunk several inches and was an obstruction in the line of travel. The plaintiff herself was not very clear as to the causé of her fall, but she said “ My foot went in and I fell,” but her companions examined the spot immediately and were more explicit.

On the question of her own negligence she was also far from clear, but among other answers she said she was just looking the way she walked. On both points it was a case for the jury.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Status
Published
Syllabus
Negligence — Municipality—Defective street — Contributory negligence— Case for jury. In an action against a city to recover damages for personal injuries, it appeared that the plaintiff while walking at night on a street stepped into a hole or depression, apparently a cover of a water box which had sunk several inches, and was an obstruction in the line of travel. Plaintiff was not clear as to the cause of her fall, but said: “My foot went in and I fell.” Her companions inspected the spot immediately and were more explicit in their description. As to whether she was looking she said that she was just looking the way she walked. Held, that the question of defendant’s negligence and plaintiff’s contributory negligence was for the jury, and that a verdict and judgment for plaintiff should be sustained.