Glading v. City of Philadelphia

• Decision Date: 21 April 1902
• Docket Number: 379
• Parties: Glading v. Philadelphia, Appellant
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

51 A. 886

202 Pa. 324

Glading v. Philadelphia, Appellant

No. 379

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

April 21, 1902

Argued: March 24, 1902

Appeal, No. 379, Jan. T., 1901, by defendant, from judgment of C.P. No. 4, Phila. Co., Dec. T., 1900, No. 454, on verdict for plaintiff, in case of Louisa Glading v. City of Philadelphia. Affirmed.

Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries.

At the trial it appeared that on September 18, 1900, plaintiff while walking in the daytime on Arch street near Eighth street in the city of Philadelphia fell as a result of stepping in a hole in the middle of the pavement, and was seriously injured. It appeared that the hole had been in the pavement six months before the accident, and at the time of the accident was filled with dust and sweepings. Plaintiff described the accident as follows:

"Q. As you were progressing up on the north side of Arch street, what happened to you? A. As I was walking along Arch street, there was a number of persons passing by, and my left foot went in the hole. Q. As you were going up the street, were other people going along? A. Yes, sir, quite a number going backward and forward. I walked along and never knew anything until I got my foot in the hole -- until I fell. I was walking along the same as I always walk along the street. I was not looking at anything. I was walking along the same as I always walk along the street. I didn't see the hole before I fell. I never knew there was a hole there. Quite a number of people were passing backward and forward. When the men picked me up I wanted to see what caused my fall; I noticed the hole."

Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $2,000. Defendant appealed.

Error assigned was in submitting the case to the jury.

The judgment is affirmed.

Howard A. Davis, assistant city solicitor, with him John L. Kinsey, for appellant.

Eugene Raymond, for appellee, was not heard.

Before McCOLLUM, C.J., DEAN, FELL, BROWN, and MESTREZAT, JJ.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

The plaintiff was injured by stepping into a hole filled with dust and sweepings. It was in the pavement of a crowded thoroughfare in the central part of the city. Whether under the circumstances she exercised reasonable care was clearly a question for the jury.

The judgment is affirmed.