Skip to main content
· 11/12/1906

Rife v. Middletown

Citations

  • 32 Pa. Super. 68
  • 1906 Pa. Super. LEXIS 286

Syllabus

<p>Pleading — Statement—Trespass—Negligence.</p> <p>Where a statement in trespass contains clear and concise averments of the acts of negligence of which complaint is made, the plaintiff is not debarred from showing in the statement other items which are the natural results of such negligent acts.</p> <p>If the defendant regards -the statement of claim as insufficient, he may demur, or apply to the court for a rule to show cause why more specific statement should not be filed. If he joins issue, goes to trial on the statement as filed, and the trial clearly shows that he was prepared to meet the testimony of the plaintiff as to the damages resulting from the nSgligence complained of, he cannot thereafter complain of the statement.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Continuance—Discretion of court.</p> <p>A motion for a continuance based upon the plea of surprise, appeals ordinarily to the discretion of the court.</p> <p>Municipalities — Obstruction in street — Negligence—Notice.</p> <p>A municipality cannot allow a dangerous obstruction in a street to exist for any considerable time, and then say it is exempt from liability, or that it had no notice, or that it had no knowledge. It is bound, after a reasonable time, to know, and if it is a defect, to remedy it.</p> <p>In an action against a borough to recover damages for injuries caused by water, it appeared that the borough had substituted pipes for an open stream, and it was averred that these pipes were insufficient to allow free passage of the water from above which ordinarily came down the course of the stream. It was also averred that the defendant had erected a wooden grating or crib above the entrance to the pipes, against which it carelessly and negligently allowed brush, dirt and débris to gather and accumulate so as to fill up the stream, clog the pipes, and dam back the water upon plaintiff's land. Held, that independently of any error of judgment in the matter of the substitution of the pipes for the open stream,

Judges: Beaver, Head, Henderson, Morrison, Orlady, Porter, Rice

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.