Boehm v. Borough of Bethlehem

Citations

• 4 Pa. Super. 385
• 1897 Pa. Super. LEXIS 131

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Independent or concurrent causes.</p> <p>When neither the allegata nor probata point to one of two independent causes as the source of alleged negligence but ascribe it to two concurrent causes, the doctrine applicable to independent causes has no application and the court is correct in refusing to instruct the jury that such doctrine should be by them considered.</p> <p>Municipal law — Liability for defective sewer — Question for jury.</p> <p>Where plaintiff alleges damages as resulting from the flooding of a sewer which had been permitted by the borough authorities to remain obstructed for a considerable space of time, the question of liability for damages resulting from the alleged concurrent causes is properly for the jury, also the question whether notice may not be presumed against the borough by reason of the lapse of a reasonable time during which examination should have been made.</p> <p>Damages — Measure of — Question for jury.</p> <p>There being abundant evidence of pecuniary damages resulting from overflow from a sewer the question of compensation is properly for the jury under adequate instructions from the court.</p>