Black v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.

Citations

• 239 Pa. 463
• 86 A. 1066
• 1913 Pa. LEXIS 589

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Proximate cause — Nonsuit—Contradictory statements — Contributory negligence.</p> <p>1. In an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by reason of a collision between the plaintiff, .while riding a bicycle, and a car of defendant company, a nonsuit is properly entered where it appears that as plaintiff was riding along a city street, he reached the intersection of another street on which defendant company operated a trolley line, and while he was twenty-seven feet from the nearest rail he saw a car only sixty or eighty feet north of the crossing; that he expected the .car would stop before making the crossing and he intended to go in front of it; that before he reached the curb, he saw the car opposite the crossing and in motion ; and he then turned into the intersecting street, intending to go back of the car, and ran into its rear end; and that when he turned he was more than thirteen feet from the nearest rail and was running very slowly so that he could have stopped within five feet.</p> <p>2. In such a case the fact that plaintiff’s first Statements of the occurrence were contradictory and the net result of his testimony was in doubt will not require the submission of the case to the jury, where plaintiff’s attention was called to the contradictions, and his final statement showed contributory negligence.</p>