Smith v. Shatz

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Writing for the CourtBARNES, Justice.
Citation200 A. 620
PartiesSMITH v. SHATZ.
Decision Date30 June 1938
200 A. 620

SMITH
v.
SHATZ.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

June 30, 1938.


200 A. 620

Appeal No. 134, January term, 1938, from the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas No. 5 of Philadelphia County, as of December Term, 1935, No. 1501; Joseph L. Kun and George G. Parry, Judges.

Trespass by Frank Smith against Phillip Shatz for injuries received as a result of being struck by an automobile driven by defendant. Verdict for plaintiff for $3,000 and from a judgment non obstante veredicto, plaintiff appeals.

Reversed and order that judgment for plaintiff be entered on the verdict.

Argued before KEPHART, C. J., and SCHAFFER, MAXEY, DREW, LINN, STERN, and BARNES, JJ.

George F. Douglas, of Philadelphia, for appellant. Norman L. Plotka and Maurice A. Granatoor, both of Philadelphia, for appellee.

BARNES, Justice.

&gt

Plaintiff was a passenger on a trolley car westbound on Girard Avenue, in the city of Philadelphia, on the 13th day of December, 1933, about 7:15 o'clock P. M., when the conductor informed him and the other passengers that the car would proceed no further west on Girard Avenue than Forty-first Street, and that they should alight there and take the next car. Plaintiff's destination was Sixty-third Street and Girard Avenue. Thereupon he and two other passengers, a man and a woman, left the car and stood in the cartway of Girard Avenue close to its intersection with Forty-first street. At the place where he awaited the car, he was about two feet north of the westbound trolley rail. The other male passenger disappeared from view, but the woman passenger continued to wait a short distance to the east of plaintiff.

The weather was clear at the time, but there had been rain and snow earlier in the day, and the streets were covered with ice and sleet. Plaintiff testified that as he stood at the intersection of the two streets, he saw the trolley car in which he had been riding make the turn north into Forty-first Street; then he glanced at the trolley switch there, and just as he turned his head to the east to see if another trolley was approaching, he was struck by defendant's automobile and dragged some eight or ten feet. According to plaintiff it was a matter of seconds only between the time he alighted from the trolley car, stood within the crossing, and the time he was struck, although he states that the trolley had completed its turn into Forty-first Street before he looked to the east.

Plaintiff was struck by the front of the car and managed to "grab hold of it". When the automobile stopped he fell to the ground, then raised himself upon his elbow, and observed the body of the woman passenger lying in the cartway some ten or

200 A. 621

twelve feet to the east of defendant's car. The record shows that the intersection was adequately lighted, and that it was clear of traffic, with nothing to obstruct the view.

The defendant was driving westward on Girard Avenue between the north car rail and curb. When called on cross-examination by plaintiff, he testified that at the time of the accident he was proceeding at a moderate rate of speed, and noticed the plaintiff and a woman standing near the north rail of the car tracks, when he was about thirty-five or forty feet distant from them; that after he had sounded his automobile horn several times the woman started to walk toward the north curb. She slipped and fell in front of his car. Defendant did not admit or deny striking the plaintiff, but asserted that he was not aware of any impact upon his car. He does admit, however, that when he came to a stop, plaintiff was lying upon the ground in front of the automobile.

The injuries sustained by plaintiff were serious in character, and it was alleged by him that he has been unable to work since the accident occurred. At that time he was employed as a watchman by a storage battery company.

Upon conclusion of plaintiff's evidence, the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • Altsman v. Kelly
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • November 27, 1939
    ...172 A. 693; MacDougall v. American Ice Co., 317 Pa. 222, 176 A. 428; Smith v. Wistar, 327 Pa. 419, 194 A. 486; Smith v. Shatz, 331 Pa. 453, 200 A. 620. While a pedestrian crossing an intersection with a green traffic light in his favor does not have an absolute right of way for the full dis......
  • Joannides v. Norris
    • United States
    • Superior Court of Pennsylvania
    • December 10, 1941
    ...must have seen if he performed his duty to look where he was driving. As stated by our Supreme Court in Smith v. Shatz, 331 Pa. 453, 456, 200 A. 620, 621: "It is well settled that to run down a pedestrian who has been standing upon the highway in plain view for a sufficient length of t......
  • Pinto v. Bell Fruit Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Superior Court
    • February 28, 1942
    ...automobile would exercise reasonable care to avoid striking him. As said by our Supreme Court in Smith v. Shatz, 331 Pa. 453, at page 456, 200 A. 620, at page 621: "It is well settled that to run down a pedestrian who has been standing upon the highway in plain view for a sufficient le......
  • Fid.-philadelphia Trust Co. v. Staats
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • March 22, 1948
    ...Cab Co., 344 Pa. 298, 302, 25 A.2d 294, 296; Simon v. Moens, 356 Pa. 361, 365, 366, 51 A.2d 737, 739; Smith v. Shatz, 331 Pa. 453, 456, 200 A. 620, 621; 57 A.2d 832 Altsman v. Kelly, 336 Pa. 481, 485, 486, 9 A.2d 423, 425); (3) that it is the presence of an intersection rather than the prec......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • Altsman v. Kelly
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • November 27, 1939
    ...172 A. 693; MacDougall v. American Ice Co., 317 Pa. 222, 176 A. 428; Smith v. Wistar, 327 Pa. 419, 194 A. 486; Smith v. Shatz, 331 Pa. 453, 200 A. 620. While a pedestrian crossing an intersection with a green traffic light in his favor does not have an absolute right of way for the full dis......
  • Joannides v. Norris
    • United States
    • Superior Court of Pennsylvania
    • December 10, 1941
    ...must have seen if he performed his duty to look where he was driving. As stated by our Supreme Court in Smith v. Shatz, 331 Pa. 453, 456, 200 A. 620, 621: "It is well settled that to run down a pedestrian who has been standing upon the highway in plain view for a sufficient length of t......
  • Pinto v. Bell Fruit Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • Pennsylvania Superior Court
    • February 28, 1942
    ...automobile would exercise reasonable care to avoid striking him. As said by our Supreme Court in Smith v. Shatz, 331 Pa. 453, at page 456, 200 A. 620, at page 621: "It is well settled that to run down a pedestrian who has been standing upon the highway in plain view for a sufficient le......
  • Fid.-philadelphia Trust Co. v. Staats
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • March 22, 1948
    ...Cab Co., 344 Pa. 298, 302, 25 A.2d 294, 296; Simon v. Moens, 356 Pa. 361, 365, 366, 51 A.2d 737, 739; Smith v. Shatz, 331 Pa. 453, 456, 200 A. 620, 621; 57 A.2d 832 Altsman v. Kelly, 336 Pa. 481, 485, 486, 9 A.2d 423, 425); (3) that it is the presence of an intersection rather than the prec......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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