Hookey v. Borough of Oakdale

Citations

• 5 Pa. Super. 404
• 1897 Pa. Super. LEXIS 261

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Sudden peril — Buies of conduct.</p> <p>When a person is putin sudden peril by the act of another and, in the instinctive effort to escape from that peril, falls upon another peril, it is immaterial whether, under different circumstances, he might and ought to have seen and avoided the latter danger.</p> <p>If a man has gotten himself, without negligence, into a position of danger, he is not responsible if he makes a mistake of judgment in getting out. A man placed under such circumstances, if he uses his judgment honestly, is not responsible, although he might have done better if he had acted differently.</p> <p>Negligenee — Contributory negligence in sudden peril — Question for jury.</p> <p>Aman driving along a public road undergoing repairs, in avoiding some stones on his right, ran into a fire plug on the left of the road. He p>ermitted his horse to continue on a trot after first sighting the stones which occupied a part of the roadway for a long distance. Held, that the question of contributory negligence was properly left to the jury.</p> <p>Municipal law — Independent contractor — Liability.</p> <p>A municipal corporation is not liable for an injury occasioned by the neglect of independent contractors with it, or of their agents and servants; the remedy is against the contractor alone.</p> <p>Municipal law — hidepe7ident contractor — Questmifor jury.</p> <p>Where there is evidence tending to show that an injury for. which the action is brought against a municipality arose upon the act of an independent contractor, it is error for the court not to leave the question to the jury under adequate instructions.</p>