Wagner v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co.

Citations

• 252 Pa. 354
• 97 A. 471
• 1916 Pa. LEXIS 620

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Street railways — Persons caught between opposite bound cars — Case for jury.</p> <p>1. The failure to anticipate negligence which results in injury is not negligence and will not defeat an action for the injury sustained. No one can complain of want of care of another where care is only rendered necessary by his own wrongful act.</p> <p>2. 'Where cars hound in opposite directions are standing discharging passengers at the near sides, respectively, of a street intersection, a pedestrian is not required to wait until both cars have passed over the crossing before attempting to cross.</p> <p>§. In an action against a street railway company to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by a pedestrian as tbe result of being caugbt in tbe space between cars bound in opposite directions on a double track line, tbe ease was for tbe jury and a compulsory nonsuit was erroneously entered where it appeared wben plaintiff started to cross tbe street tbe cars were standing discharging passengers at tbe near sides, respectively, of tbe street intersection; that wben be was between tbe two tracks tbe car on tbe far track started and suddenly stopped, blocking tbe crossing, and while be was passing around tbe rear of this car the other approached without warning and wedged him in tbe narrow space between tbe ears.</p> <p>4. In such case tbe plaintiff was not bound to anticipate tbe negligent act of tbe motorman of tbe car on the near track in failing to look in tbe direction in which bis car was approaching and to keep it under tbe proper control.</p>