Gerber v. Philadelphia

Citations

• 60 Pa. Super. 119
• 1915 Pa. Super. LEXIS 155

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Municipalities—Open trench in street — Contributory negligence — Case for jury.</p> <p>1. Where a city has by proper proceedings widened a street which was actually built up, and thereafter through a contractor opened a trench along the untraveled portion of the street for the purpose of constructing a sewer, and places temporary crossings over the trench in front of the houses, as an invitation to those occupying the houses and those visiting them to use the crossings, the city is bound properly to guard and light such crossing at night as will reasonably protect persons using them; and if a woman in the night-time attempts to use one of the crossings without negligence on her part, and falls into the trench and is injured, the city is liable to pay her for the injuries which she had sustained.</p> <p>2. In such a case if the woman has but a vague knowledge of the existence of the trench, and there is no light at the crossing to guide her, or barriers along the side to protect her, she cannot be charged with contributory negligence as a matter of law in attempting the crossing.</p> <p>3. Where a city lets out a contract for the construction of a sewer in a street, and the contractor opens a trench in the street, and a person is injured one week thereafter by falling into the trench a jury may find that the city had constructive notice of the existence of the trench.</p> <p>Negligence — Damages—Loss of earnings.</p> <p>4. In a negligence case failure on the part of the trial judge to charge as to the present worth of future earnings and how they may be arrived at, is not to be treated as an inadequacy of charge, but as reversible error, and this is the case although no request is made by either side for specific instructions on the subject.</p>