Auberle v. City of McKeesport

Citations

• 179 Pa. 321
• 36 A. 212
• 1897 Pa. LEXIS 639

Syllabus

<p>Evidence — Opinion of witnesses.</p> <p>Where mere descriptive language is inadequate to convey to the jury the precise facts or their bearing on the issue, the description by the witness must of necessity be allowed to be supplemented by his opinion, in order to put the jury in position to finally determine the facts; but where 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>Negligence — Bridge—Guard rail.</p> <p>In an action against a city to recover damages for personal injuries caused by falling over a side of a bridge which was without a guard rail, it appeared that the bridge was in a rural district, that it was the full width of the road, thirty-three feet, seventeen feet in length, and five feet above the bed of the stream which it crossed. The only complaint made of the bridge was the absence of a guard rail. Held, (1) that there was not sufficient evidence of negligence on the part of the city to submit to the jury; (2) that as the situation was capable of full and exact description the opinions of witnesses as to whether a guard rail made the bridge dangerous for ordinary travel were inadmissible.</p> <p>Negligence — Contributory negligence — Bridge—Guard rail.</p> <p>In an action against a city to recover damages for personal injuries caused by falling over the side of a bridge which was without a guard rail, it appeared that the plaintiff started out about nine o’clock at night without a lantern to hunt her cow. She proceeded over a rough road across farm lands, found her cow and in driving it home came to the bridge. The plaintiff had lived for many years within eight hundred feet of the bridge and was familiar with the locality. The night was moonless but there were electric lights in the neighborhood. Plaintiff testified that she saw a big man two or