Ake v. City of Pittsburgh

Citations

• 238 Pa. 371
• 86 A. 268
• 1913 Pa. LEXIS 976

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Municipalities—Streets—Hole in cartway — CWtributory negligence■ — Expert testimony — Case for fury.</p> <p>1. When all the circumstances can be fully and adequately described to the jury and are such that their bearing on the issue can be estimated by all men, without special knowledge or training, opinions of witnesses, expert or other, are not admissible.</p> <p>2. Where an accident occurred in consequence of a person having driven into a hole in a public street under conditions fully described by the witnesses, expert testimony cannot be received as to whether or not deceased could have avoided the accident.</p> <p>3. In an action against a city to recover damages for the death of the plaintiff’s husband it appeared that the accident was caused by the overturning of the decedent’s wagon in consequence of his having driven into a hole about three feet wide and sixteen to twenty inches deep in the road bed of a public street in defendant city; that there were numerous unusual conditions, obstructions and irregularities át and about the place of the accident including a stone pilo and a plank foot path not perfectly level with the street to which the decedent was obliged to pay heed; that the hole was in the path which under the surrounding conditions any one who drove in the direction taken by the decedent was obliged to use and that it had been there for at least three weeks; and there was no testimony to indicate that the deceased was driving in a careless or reckless manner. Held, that the questions of defendant’s negligence and plaintiff’s contributory negligence were for the jury.</p>