Ashby v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.

Decision Date07 May 1947
Docket Number3156
Citation356 Pa. 610,52 A.2d 578
PartiesAshby, Admr., Appellant, v. Philadelphia Transportation Company
CourtPennsylvania Supreme Court

Argued April 18, 1947

Appeal, No. 99, Jan. T., 1947, from order of C.P. No. 4 Phila. Co., March T., 1945, No. 382, in case of Thomas Ashby Sr., Admr., Estate of Mary Ashby, deceased, v. Philadelphia Transportation Company. Order affirmed; reargument refused May 26, 1947.

Trespass for wrongful death. Before BLUETT, J.

Compulsory nonsuit entered. Motion to take off nonsuit denied. Plaintiff appealed.

The order overruling the motion to take off the nonsuit is affirmed.

William F. Quinlan, with him Bronte Greenwood and Victor Frey, for appellant.

John J. McDevitt, 3rd, with him Bernard J O'Connell, for appellee.

Before MAXEY, C.J., DREW, LINN, STERN, PATTERSON, and STEARNE, JJ.

OPINION

MR. JUSTICE HORACE STERN

This action was instituted by Thomas Ashby, Sr., to recover in his own right and as administrator of the estate of his wife, Mary Ashby, damages for her death, which, he alleged was caused by the negligence of the motorman operating one of defendant company's trolley cars. He was unsuccessful in his suit because of his inability to prove the manner in which the accident happened and the facts necessary to establish liability. The court was therefore obliged to enter a nonsuit.

Between 7.30 and 8.00 o'clock in the morning of a December day Mrs. Ashby, a woman aged 53 years, was walking briskly westward on the north side of Harrison Street. The weather was damp and misty; the darkness was just giving way to dawn, and automobiles and trolley cars still had their lights on. Reaching Frankford Avenue she stepped off the east curb with the apparent intention of crossing that street from the northeast to the northwest corner of the Harrison Street intersection. There are double trolley tracks on Frankford Avenue separated by a "dummy" track approximately 11 feet in width. An elevated railway overhangs the roadway; one of its supporting pillars stretches across the "dummy" area just north of the north crosswalk of Harrison Street. No witness saw Mrs. Ashby after she left the sidewalk, but it was testified that at that time a north-bound trolley car on Frankford Avenue was standing at the southeast corner discharging passengers and a south-bound car was approaching the northwest corner. No witness saw the north-bound car start up or move across Harrison Street. The south-bound car came to a stop at the north crossing and passengers boarded it there; it started up again but came so suddenly to a second stop that one of the witnesses testified: "I don't think it went at all", and at that same moment the motorman on that car exclaimed that a woman had been hit. The north-bound car was now standing alongside of the south-bound car with its rear at about the north crosswalk, and Mrs. Ashby was lying in the "dummy" track between the two cars at a distance of some 20 or 25 feet north of the intersection. Her injuries were so severe that as a result of them she died a week later.

From this evidence it may fairly be inferred that Mrs. Ashby was struck by the north-bound car, for the facts exclude any possibility of her having come in contact with the south-bound car or that she was struck by some other vehicle on the highway. But was the accident due to negligence on the part of the motorman? The record is lacking in testimony that would satisfactorily support an affirmative answer to that question.

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur does not apply to a collision between a pedestrian and a vehicle at a crossing any more than at other points on the highway: Sajatovich v Traction Bus Company, 314 Pa. 569, 574, 172 A. 148, 150; Brooks v. Morgan, 331 Pa. 235, 240, 200 A. 81, 839 While the person who is killed in an accident is presumed to have used due care, that presumption does not fasten upon a defendant the imputation of negligence on the theory that if the victim was not negligent the defendant must have been; it still remains...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT