Donze v. Devlin

CourtPennsylvania Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtMR. JUSTICE DREW:
CitationDonze v. Devlin, 329 Pa. 1, 195 A. 882 (Pa. 1938)
Decision Date03 January 1938
Docket Number329
PartiesDonze et al., Appellants, v. Devlin

Argued December 7, 1937

Appeal, No. 329, Jan. T., 1937, from judgment of C.P. No. 4 Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1931, No. 4328, in case of Thomas J Donze, by his father, Martin F. Donze, and his mother, Loretta Donze and Martin F. Donze and Loretta Donze in their own right, v. Mary T. Devlin, executrix of Estate of John Devlin, Jr., deceased. Judgment reversed with a venire.

Trespass for personal injuries. Before KEENAN, J., specially presiding.

The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.

Compulsory nonsuit entered. Motion to take it off refused. Plaintiffs appealed.

Error assigned was refusal to take off nonsuit.

Judgment reversed with a venire.

Maurice H. Brown, with him William N. Nitzberg and W. F. Starsinic, for appellants.

Layton M. Schoch, for appellee.

Before SCHAFFER, MAXEY, DREW, LINN, STERN and BARNES, JJ.

OPINION

MR. JUSTICE DREW:

The appeal is from the refusal to take off a compulsory nonsuit entered at the conclusion of plaintiffs' evidence. Whether they established a prima facie case, taking the testimony in its most favorable light (Foley v. Wasserman, 319 Pa. 420; Burns v. Pittsburgh, 320 Pa. 92; Deemer v. Weaver, 324 Pa. 85), is the controlling question. If they did the nonsuit must be set aside.

In 1929 the Board of Public Education of the School District of Philadelphia executed a written lease of the Fox Chase School Building, no longer used for school purposes, to Boy Scout Troop No. 283, District 10. The lease was from month to month at a nominal rent, either party having the right to terminate it upon twenty days' written notice. Following the execution of the lease, the building was constantly used by the scouts, and in it all the equipment that the troop possessed was stored, including various flags, banners, drums, desks, books, and other paraphernalia. Without notice to the lessee the board of education awarded a contract for the demolition of the school building. The contractor had begun the work of destruction on August 19, 1931, when it came to the attention of the scouts. Several of them started to remove the troop's equipment and were stopped by the contractor's foreman, who told them they might return late in the afternoon after the men quit work. This they did, bringing with them a younger brother of two members of the troop, ten years of age. The latter, while assisting in recovering some books from a window sill in one of the rooms on the second floor, fell through the open floor and was injured. It appears that "about five feet from the wall the whole length of the floor" had been torn up and that the only means of access to the books on the window sill was a "beam" or "joist." It was while walking along this "beam" or "joist" that the boy slipped and fell. The suit is by the injured boy and his parents to recover for the minor's personal injuries; it is now directed against the personal representative of the contractor, his death having preceded the time of trial.

We think the nonsuit improper. The right to the possession of the school premises was in the lessee troop. Plaintiffs' testimony was to the effect not only that no notice to terminate was ever given, but there is also a presumption of the continuance of a lease until notice of its termination American Coal Land Co. v. Miller, 182 Ky. 51; Dobbelaar v. Hughes, 109 N.J. Eq. 200; see 2 Greenleaf, Evidence (16th ed.), section 319. A status...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
15 cases
  • Solomon v. Neisner Bros.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania
    • October 3, 1950
    ...R. C. Cong. v. Kingston Coal Co., 221 Pa. 349, 364, 70 A. 838. There is a presumption that the status continues. Donze v. Devlin, 329 Pa. 1, at page 3, 195 A. 882. 10 "The term `premises' is used in common parlance to signify land, with its appurtenances; but its usual and appropriate meani......
  • Fabel v. Hazlett
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Superior Court
    • July 19, 1945
    ... ... Phila. & ... Reading Ry. Co., 252 Pa. 391 [97 A. 476]; Gerg v ... Penna. R. R. Co., 254 Pa. 316 [98 A. 960]; Donze v ... Devlin, 329 Pa. 1 [195 A. 882]." The evidence does not ... conclusively show, as appellant contends, that the accident ... happened by the ... ...
  • Bekins Van & Storage Co. v. State Corp. Commission of N. M., 6509
    • United States
    • New Mexico Supreme Court
    • April 14, 1959
    ...by which a condition of a continuous nature once established may be assumed to continue until the contrary is shown. Cf. Donze v. Devlin, 329 Pa. 1, 195 A. 882.' In Application of Transport, Inc. of South Dakota, supra [75 S.D. 340, 64 N.W.2d 315], the court '* * * We think it would be cont......
  • Marron v. Elmquist
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Superior Court
    • June 29, 1938
    ...question of negligence is for the jury: Frank v. Cohen, 288 Pa. 221, 135 A. 624; Todd v. Nesta, 305 Pa. 280, 157 A. 678; Donze et al. v. Devlin, 329 Pa. 1, 195 A. 882. driver of appellee's car, J. Taylor Morgan testified that "the road going by the Stone House is level and right then it sta......
  • Get Started for Free