Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

VISOKAY v. UNITED STATES

April 8, 1949

VISOKAY
v.
UNITED STATES



The opinion of the court was delivered by: MCVICAR

This is an action to recover damages against the United States of America under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 60 Stat. 843, (1946), as amended, 1947, 28 U.S.C.A. § 931, *fn1" for the death of Mary T. Visokay. The Court, after hearing, makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law:

Findings of Fact

 1. The plaintiff, Mary Visokay, is the Executrix of the estate of Mary T. Visokay, deceased, and is a citizen of Pennsylvania residing in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

 2. By virtue of the Federal Tort Claims Act and the laws of Pennsylvania, two causes of action are set forth in the complaint; a wrongful death action under the Pennsylvania Acts of 1851 and 1855, P.L. 669, 309, 12 P.S. §§ 1601-1603, and a survival action under the Pennsylvania Act of 1937, P.L. 2755, 20 P.S. §§ 321 note, 772.

 3. On January 8, 1948 at approximately 8:15 P.M., Mary T. Visokay was crossing Grant Street in the City of Pittsburgh at the regular pedestrian crossing located at Fourth Avenue when she was struck by a United States mail truck driven by a postal employee acting within the regular scope of his employment. She was removed by the Pittsburgh police to the Mercy Hospital where she died fifty minutes after the accident.

 4. The accident occurred after dark, but the street corner was well lighted. The weather was clear and the streets were dry.

 5. Lonzo Green, the only eye witness to the events leading up to the accident, was driving his truck South on Grant Street in the inside traffic lane just prior to the accident. He stopped his truck at the intersection of Fourth Avenue because the traffic light signal for Grant Street traffic had changed to red.

 6. While waiting for the light to change, Green saw the deceased start to cross Grant Street from the east sidewalk toward the west side with the green light in her favor. There was no other traffic at the intersection at that time.

 7. Grant Street at this point, is fifty-five feet wide and when the deceased was approximately in front of Green's truck, the traffic light changed to green for Grant Street traffic and red for traffic crossing Grant Street. The deceased hesitated and when Green indicated that he would wait for her to cross, she continued to cross in front of his truck.

 9. There was a distance of at least eight feet between Green's truck and the defendant's truck which was passing on the right.

 10. The driver of the defendant's truck failed to see the deceased until just before the left front fender of his truck struck her. The driver was unable to bring his truck to a stop until after he had crossed Fourth Avenue which is twenty-one feet wide.

 11. The defendant's employee was negligent in failing to see the deceased until too late to avoid striking her; and in failing to have his truck under such control that he could stop on the least possible notice. This negligence was the proximate cause of the injury. The deceased was not guilty of contributory negligence.

 12. While there was no evidence of the deceased's pain and suffering after being removed from the scene of the accident, both truck drivers testified that the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.