Yocum v. Reading City
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Yocum v. Reading City, 235 Pa. 552 (Pa. 1912)
84 A. 510; 1912 Pa. LEXIS 586
Brown, Elkin, Fell, Mestrezat, Stewart
Yocum v. Reading City
Opinion of the Court
The negligence of the city in not maintaining its streets in a safe condition, if not conceded was not disputed and the' only question at the trial was whether the plaintiff made out a case clear of contributory negligence. On this subject nothing can be added to what is said by Judge Endlich in discharging the rules for a new trial and for judgment non obstante veredicto.
The judgment is affirmed.
Reference
- Cited By
- 5 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Negligence — Defective street — Holes in asphalt — Motor cycle— Contributory negligence. In an action against a city to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff by reason of a fall from a motor cycle, the plaintiff cannot be convicted of contributory negligence as a matter of law, where the evidence shows that at the time of the accident the plaintiff was riding over an asphalt pavement broken up with numerous holes; that he was not familiar with the street, which had been recently sprinkled; that he slowed down to a very slow speed; that beyond a particular corner he encountered a large hole, but passed it keeping close to the curb; that looking ahead of him he observed between the curb and the street railway track several teams, some moving and some standing near the curb, and that with his attention directed partly to the street bed and partly to the teams, he ran into another hole which he did not see and was thrown and injured.