Mayhugh v. Somerset Telephone Co.

Citations

• 265 Pa. 498
• 109 A. 211
• 1920 Pa. LEXIS 467

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Telephone company — Charged wire — Contributory negligence — Pedestrians—Anticipating danger — Case for jury.</p> <p>1. In an action against a telephone company to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been caused by a charged wire dangling five or six feet above the surface of a street the questions of the defendant’s negligence and plaintiff’s contributory negligence are for the jury, where the evidence tends to show that plaintiff on the day of the accident diagonally crossed the street where the wire was dangling, instead of going directly over at a crossing and then along a sidewalk; that as he crossed he had his head down, and did not see the wire, although two of his witnesses saw it shortly before; that as he crossed he suddenly became unconscious ; and that he was found in this condition, with the hanging wire running through his left hand, and with smoke coming through his hat.</p> <p>2. In such a case the plaintiff was not bound to look up, nor to anticipate danger from a wire sagging in front of him. The rule requiring pedestrians to look out for defects in streets, did not apply to him, as the defect was not manifest.</p>