Opinion
October 13, 1924.
November 24, 1924.
Negligence — Street railways — Contributory negligence — Crossing in front of car — Nonsuit.
In an action against a street railway company for death of plaintiff's husband killed while crossing a street, a nonsuit is properly entered where the evidence offered by plaintiff shows that, although deceased saw the car approaching, he undertook to cross the track in front of it.
Appeal, No. 78, Oct. T., 1924, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. Allegheny Co., April T., 1922, No. 2436, refusing to take off nonsuit, in case of Rosie Lukachyk v. W. D. George et al., receivers of Pittsburgh Railways Co.
Before MOSCHZISKER, C. J., FRAZER, WALLING, SIMPSON, KEPHART, SADLER and SCHAFFER, JJ. Affirmed.
Trespass for death of plaintiff's husband. Before CARPENTER, J.
The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.
Nonsuit; refusal to take off. Plaintiff appealed.
Error assigned was order, quoting record.
Ralph P. Tannehill, for appellant.
Craig Smith, for appellees.
Argued October 13, 1924.
While attempting to cross the tracks of defendant company, plaintiff's husband was struck and killed by its electric car. Evidence at the trial disclosed the fact, which was not contradicted, that, though deceased saw the car approaching, he undertook to cross the tracks in front of it. A compulsory nonsuit was granted, which the court in banc refused to remove, and the present appeal followed.
We have examined the record and are of opinion the nonsuit was proper under the circumstances as disclosed by the evidence.
The appeal is dismissed.