Brenisholtz v. Pennsylvania Railroad

Citations

• 229 Pa. 88
• 78 A. 37
• 1910 Pa. LEXIS 556

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Evidence—Carlisle Tables — Instructions to jury.</p> <p>1. In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, it is not error to admit the Carlisle Tables as set out in a work on “Inheritance Tax Calculations,” where there has been an exact correspondence of the tables offered and those set out in works previously approved by the Supreme Court.</p> <p>2. In such a case, where there is evidence tending to show that the plaintiff was in good health prior to the accident, it is proper to instruct the jury that the Carlisle Tables are evidence, not to prove the precise term of plaintiff’s life, but t® be considered in connection with other testimony, for the purpose of determining her probable expectancy of life.</p> <p>Trial — Court—Remarks of counsel — Withdrawing furor.</p> <p>3. In an action to recover damages for personal injuries where counsel, in summing up, states the amount of plaintiff’s claim, but immediately withdraws the remark and asks that the jury be instructed to disregard it, which is done, and where the verdict is not unreasonable, no inference of damage to defendant can fairly be drawn, and the appellate court will not reverse a judgment for plaintiff because the trial judge refused to withdraw a juror.</p> <p>Negligence — Railroads—Train hacked off siding — Sleeping woman— Proximate cause — Contributory negligence.</p> <p>4. In an action against a railroad company to recover damages for personal injuries, where it appears that the negligent operation of defendant’s train caused it to be driven against plaintiff’s house, wrecking the rear portion, and leaving an opening into which the plaintiff almost immediately fell, in the darkness, while seeking to reach her children by the customary way to the room where they slept, the negligence of defendant is established as the proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries, and the question of contributory negligence is for the jury.</p>