Conklin v. Beaver Valley Traction Co.

Citations

• 266 Pa. 164
• 109 A. 671
• 1920 Pa. LEXIS 528

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Street railways — Infant— Conflicting testimony— Failure to ash instructions at the trial — Speed.</p> <p>1. Where in a negligence case against a street railway company for injuries to a child run down by an electric car, the evidence of two children called for the plaintiff is contradicted by the motorman, and is inconsistent with other testimony in the case, and the trial judge in his charge briefly calls attention to such inconsistencies, the defendant, after an adverse verdict, cannot, on appeal, complain that further instructions were not given, where the record shows that the trial judge expressly asked whether further instructions were desired, and that counsel for defendant sat silent without making any suggestion.</p> <p>2. In such a case where the trial judge gives concise and clear instructions as to the single question at issue, the defendant cannot complain that further instructions as to the speed of the car were not given, if a request for such instructions was not made at the trial.</p>