Rothacker v. Philadelphia

Citations

• 42 Pa. Super. 408
• 1910 Pa. Super. LEXIS 342

Syllabus

<p>Practice, C. P. — Motion for judgment non obstante veredicto — Exception — Appeals.</p> <p>1. A party asking for a judgment non obstante veredicto and failing to secure it must ask for and obtain an exception. The court is not required to grant an exception and place it in the record, unless it is asked for by the ruling party. An assignment of error to such ruling of the court without an exception having been allowed will not be considered.</p> <p>Negligence — Municipalities—Sidewalks—Ice and snow■ — Evidence. -</p> <p>2. In an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by a fall on an ice-covered sidewalk, the question of the municipality’s negligence is for the jury, where a number of witnesses testify that an unusual amount of snow had fallen during the winter, that the Sidewalk had not been cleaned during the winter, that the only passable place thereon was a narrow path described by one of the witnesses as a snake path, and that the obstruction had continued for a long time prior to the date of the accident.</p> <p>3. In such a case the plaintiff is chargeable with contributory negligence as a matter of law where the evidence shows that when the plaintiff approached the pavement she saw its dangerous condition, that she could have avoided it by going upon the cartway or to the opposite sidewalk both of which were clear and in good order, and that she persisted in going along the obstructed sidewalk for about fifty feet before the accident occurred.</p>