Bliss v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.

Citations

• 73 Pa. Super. 173
• 1919 Pa. Super. LEXIS 197

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Street railways — Passenger—Jolt of car — Evidence —Case for jury.</p> <p>In an action by a passenger against a street railway company to recover damages for personal injuries, tbe case is for tbe jury and a verdict and judgment for plaintiff will be sustained, where tbe evidence establishes tbe fact that tbe accident was caused by a jolt due to tbe abrupt stopping of the car, and sufficiently described by the use of general terms in tbe evidence, as to tbe effect on tbe passengers.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Res judicata — Compulsory nonsuit — Effect of.</p> <p>While it is true that a compulsory nonsuit after tbe presentation of tbe plaintiff’s case has tbe effect of a judgment for tbe defendant on a demurrer to tbe evidence, to the extent that it puts tbe plaintiff out of court, its legal effect is entirely different. No judgment is entered on tbe merits of tbe case. It is not contended that tbe court in such procedure could enter judgment for tbe defendant or against tbe plaintiff. No appeal is allowed, under tbe statute, from tbe action of tbe court in granting such nonsuit. The right of appeal arises when tbe court refuses to take off tbe nonsuit, and it is tbe judgment of tbe court, on the latter question which the plaintiff may have reviewed. If tbe defendant desires to test tbe sufficiency of tbe plaintiff’s case on tbe merits, be should demur to the evidence and thereby raise an issue, on which tbe judgment of tbe court could be taken but, if be seeks to avoid tbe risk of sucb ,a course and only asks for a nonsuit, be is not left in a situation to object to a second action on tbe same cause.</p>