From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Potochink v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Nov 8, 1954
379 Pa. 154 (Pa. 1954)

Summary

affirming on trial court opinion

Summary of this case from Mitchell v. Gravely International, Inc.

Opinion

October 8, 1954.

November 8, 1954.

Negligence — Street railways — Pedestrian — Contributory negligence — Accident near intersection.

In this case, in which a pedestrian who was walking in a northwesterly direction across a street was struck by a westbound trolley car, it was Held, in the circumstances, that the court below had properly denied defendant's motions for judgment n.o.v. and for a new trial.

Argued October 8, 1954. Before STERN, C. J., STEARNE, JONES, CHIDSEY, MUSMANNO and ARNOLD, JJ.

Appeal, No. 268, March T., 1954, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, April T., 1950, No. 353, in case of Marie E. Potochnik v. Pittsburgh Railways Company. Judgment affirmed; reargument refused November 17, 1954.

Trespass for personal injuries. Before ADAMS, J.

Verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $17,000.; defendant's motions for new trial and judgment n.o.v. refused and judgment entered on the verdict. Defendant appealed.

Donald M. Bane, with him James A. Geltz, Leo Daniels and Prichard, Lawler Geltz, for appellant.

P. J. McArdle, for appellee.


The judgment is affirmed on the opinion of Judge ADAMS.


Summaries of

Potochink v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Nov 8, 1954
379 Pa. 154 (Pa. 1954)

affirming on trial court opinion

Summary of this case from Mitchell v. Gravely International, Inc.
Case details for

Potochink v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.

Case Details

Full title:Potochnik v. Pittsburgh Railways Co., Appellant

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Nov 8, 1954

Citations

379 Pa. 154 (Pa. 1954)
108 A.2d 733

Citing Cases

Lebeck v. William A. Jarvis, Inc.

Cf. Potochnik v. Pittsburgh Rwys. Co., 1954, 379 Pa. 154. 108 A.2d 733, 738, and Broad v. Pennsylvania R.…

Commonwealth v. Yale

Our review of Daddona , as well as prior relevant case law, also leads us to conclude there is no absolute…