Renney v. Webster, Monessen, Bellevernon & Fayette City Street Railway Co.

Citations

• 50 Pa. Super. 579
• 1912 Pa. Super. LEXIS 98

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Street railways — Standing upon platform.</p> <p>1. When a passenger on an electric car by invitation of the conductor, or with his knowledge and assent, and from necessity because of the want of sitting or standing room inside the car, rides on the platform, he is entitled to the same degree of diligence to protect him from dangers which are known, and may readily be guarded against as are other passengers. If the evidence is conflicting as to whether there is available space inside the car, the case is for the jury on the question of the passenger’s contributory negligence.</p> <p>2. In an action by a passenger against a street railway company to recover damages for personal injuries sustained while standing upon the platform, the case is for the jury on the question of defendant’s negligence and plaintiff’s contributory negligence, where the evidence is conflicting as to whether there was available standing space inside the car, and the evidence for the plaintiff tends to show that the car on which he was a passenger was started by an official of the company within four or five yards of another car, on the same track; that the forward car in taking a curve lost its trolley, when its lights went out; that the second car struck it within a minute after it had started, and that the motorman of the second car admitted that he did not have his car under such control as to avoid the accident although his brakes and other appliances were in proper condition, so that he could have stopped the car, if he had been careful, within a safe distance.</p>