Pennsylvania state reports Volume 267 - Tapa blanda

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1921 Excerpt: ...negligence: Shields v. P. R. T. Co., 261 Pa. 422; Cronmuller v. Evening Telegraph, 232 Pa. 14; Werst v. Lehigh Val. R. R., 190 Pa. 482; Reed v. P., C., C. & St. L. Ry., 243 Pa. 562; Van Zandt v. P., B. & W. R. R., 248 Pa. 276; Glunt v. P. R. R., 249 Pa. 522. Wm. Clarke Mason, for appellee, cited: Stoker v. P. & R. Ry., 254 Pa. 494; Sweatman v. Penna. R. R., 264 Pa. 286. OPINION BY Ma. JUSTICE KEPHABT, March 22, 1920: If we assume defendant was negligent, there is not the shadow of a doubt but that plaintiff was likewise negligent. The evidence shows plaintifi was assisting, with six others, in moving a carload of coal from between two tracks of the Midvale Steel & Ordnance Company into the gas plant of that company. As relating to the accident: Track No. 1 was a short sidetrack or spur from track No. 2. The coal from a car on track No. 1 was piled between these tracks, shoveled into wheelbarrows and hauled up an incline into the gas plant. The place where the men worked was lighted, sufficiently for their Von. ocLxvn--23 Opinion of the Court. 267 Pa. work, from the plant and yard lights. There was a space of fifteen feet between the two tracks, and track No. 2 was clear for train movements. No part of plaintiffs work required him to be on that track, there was no path across the track, nor was there anything to indicate to a train crew it was being used. Plaintiff was standing alongside of another workman who was just north of him, with plaintiffs back to track No. 2 and within from four to ten inches of its nearest rail. While plaintiff was in the act of stooping, an engine of defendant shifted three or four cars on track 2, the overhang struck plaintifi, throwing him to the ground and causing the injuries complained of. When the train stop...