Clark v. Lancaster

Citations

• 229 Pa. 161
• 78 A. 86
• 1910 Pa. LEXIS 564

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Municipal corporations — Sidewalks—Loose grate — Curb —Contributory negligence — Burden of proof.</p> <p>1. Negligence of plaintiff, contributing to an injury complained of, is a matter of defense and ordinarily the burden of proving it is on the defendant.</p> <p>2. The rule that a plaintiff must present a case clear of contributory negligence does not mean that after proving affirmatively that the defendant’s negligence caused the injury, he must prove negatively that he himself was not guilty of negligence that contributed to the result.</p> <p>3. In an action against a city to recover damages for personal injuries received from stepping upon a loose grate over a gutter, an admission by plaintiff that she was not looking down as she walked along, but was looking straight ahead is not sufficient to convict her of con-tributary negligence unless it also conclusively appears from the testimony that if she had looked she could not have helped seeing the danger. , ' .</p> <p>4. In such a case where two witnesses for the plaintiff apparently contradict each other as to whether the grate was visibly loose and out of place, and it is not clear whether the plaintiff could have seen it, it is for the jury to reconcile the conflicting statements of the witnesses, and a nonsuit should not be entered.</p>