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.

SCULL v. EPSTEIN (11/14/50)

November 14, 1950

SCULL
v.
EPSTEIN



COUNSEL

S. B. Slovsky, Gerber & Galfand, Philadelphia, for appellant.

Lynn L. Detweiler, Swartz, Campbell & Henry, Philadelphia, for appellee.

Before Rhodes, P. J., and Hirt, Reno, Dithrich, Ross, Arnold and Gunther, JJ.

Author: Reno

[ 167 Pa. Super. Page 576]

RENO, Judge.

Appellant recovered a verdict for $446.75, damages to his automobile incurred in a collision with defendant's truck whose driver allegedly disregarded a traffic signal at a street intersection. Upon a finding of contributory negligence, the court below entered judgment n. o. v. for the defendant.

The collision occurred in the center of the intersection of Fifteenth Street and Fairmount Avenue. Fifteenth Street is 40 to 50 feet wide, runs north and south, and intersects Fairmount Avenue at right angles. Fairmount Avenue is approximately 60 feet wide with a 15 feet wide sidewalk, and runs east and west. An automatic overhead traffic light was operating at the time of the accident, 7:30 p. m., on March 7, 1949.

[ 167 Pa. Super. Page 577]

Appellant was proceeding south in the middle of Fifteenth Street at about 20 miles an hour. The light was green in his favor. When he was 20 to 25 feet north of the north building line of Fairmount Avenue he looked to his left for west bound traffic on Fairmount Avenue and observed an automobile standing still in the middle of Fairmount Avenue, facing west, apparently waiting for the red light to change to green. He saw no other traffic at that time, and he looked a second time, at a point not definitely fixed in his direct examination, when he saw defendant's truck passing the stopped automobile, and traveling west. He testified: 'It was right in front of me traveling at a high rate of speed. I slammed on my brakes but it was too late.' The front of appellant's car collided with the right side of the truck at the truck's right cab door.

On cross-examination, appellant fixed his points of observation more definitely, and admitted that defendant's truck was in the intersection before he reached it. The pertinent cross-examination follows.

'By Mr. Detweiler: * * * Q. About how far was your auto above the curbline when you first looked? A. I was about twenty or twenty-five feet back of the building line. * * *

'Q. Did you see this truck at that time? * * * A. The first time I looked to my left I didn't see the truck. The second ...


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.