Lapsley v. Pittsburgh Railways Co.

Citations

• 243 Pa. 167
• 89 A. 874
• 1914 Pa. LEXIS 592

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Street rilways — Trolley cars — Duty to avoid frightening horses — Case for jury.</p> <p>1. While it is unquestionably the duty of a motorman to ring his gong with emphasis upon proper occasions, it may be negligence to ring it violently and unnecessarily, in proximity to a frightened horse whose condition is manifest.</p> <p>2. In an action against a street railway company to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff in consequence of being thrown from a wagon by the frightening of his horse, plaintiff’s evidence tended to show that he was driving across a bridge over which defendant’s cars ran; that his horse was frightened by an approaching passenger car, the gong of which was being violently rung as it neared the bridge; .and that the motorman continued to ring the gong though he could have seen that plaintiff’s horse was shying and excited, and though plaintiff warned him to stop by throwing up his hand. Defendant offered evidence to the effect that the horse frightened at an ash car, which was standing still in front of the passenger car; that the passenger car had also stopped and was started again in the usual quiet way, with perhaps a single tap of the gong; and that the mere sight of the car proceeding in the ordinary way caused the horse to shy and become unmanageable. The trial judge left the question of defendant’s negligence' to the jury, who found a verdict for the plaintiff upon which judgment was entered. Seld, no error.</p>