Fox v. Borkey
Citations
- 126 Pa. 164
- 17 A. 604
- 1889 Pa. LEXIS 852
Syllabus
<p>Where, upon the evidence adduced in an action for negligence, it was ■ manifest that there was no negligence on the part of the defendant; that the injury was not the proximate result of the act complained of (blasting with dynamite), and that, if it had been, the plaintiff herself was guilty of contributory negligence, it was error to refuse defendant’s requést for peremptory instructions in his favor.'</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- failure to reopen record to submit form as evidence to contradict claimant’s testimony would not have materially affected outcome of case because form and other evidence demonstrate claimant’s willingness to work
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: McCollum, Mitchell, Paxson, Sterrett, Williams
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.