Picard v. Ridge Avenue Passenger Railway Co.

Citations

• 147 Pa. 195
• 23 A. 566
• 1892 Pa. LEXIS 811

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Street railways.</p> <p>The fact that the conductor of a street car is inside the car when it has slowed up at a street crossing to permit a passenger to ascend, is no evidence of negligence on the part of the railway company.</p> <p>Contributory negligence — Boarding a car in motion.</p> <p>A passenger who attempts to get on board a street car, especially if it is in motion, and the conductor inside, must be held to a reasonable degree of care.</p> <p>Nonsuit — Contributory negligence — Evidence.</p> <p>In an action against a street passenger railway company for personal injuries, the plaintiff is properly nonsuited when he testifies as follows: “ I was standing at the look-out corner .... and I signaled the driver to stop. He stopped the car; by the time it came to me it had a little speed, but was moving so little that it would not be noticed. I was facing the left hand side of the car coming down, placed my left hand on the hand rail and my right foot on the step, when I heard the break go off, and before I had firm footing the car moved, pulled me along and broke my arm; I was dragged a short distance.”</p>