Appeals, Nos. 31 and 32, Oct. T., 1956, from judgments of Court of Common Pleas No. 4 of Philadelphia County, Dec. T., 1953, No. 5282, in cases of Albert J. Cericola v. Hilder D. Redmon; and Joseph Milano v. Hilder D. Redmon and Albert J. Cericola. Judgments affirmed.
J. Webster Jones, for appellant.
Thomas R. White, Jr., for appellees.
Before Hirt, Gunther, Wright, Woodside, Ervin, and Carr, JJ. (rhodes, P.j., absent).
[ 182 Pa. Super. Page 20]
This is an appeal from the refusal of the Court below to grant motions for judgment n.o.v. and for new trials after verdicts for the plaintiffs in actions arising out of an automobile collision at a right angle city street intersection.
[ 182 Pa. Super. Page 21]
The facts viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, as we are here required to view them, are as follows:
On April 21, 1953, the plaintiff, Cericola, accompanied by his passenger Milano, the other plaintiff, was driving his automobile south on 25th Street in Philadelphia approaching Thompson Street. The defendant, Redmon, was driving his automobile east on Thompson Street, which is a one way street with a "Stop" sign requiring traffic to stop before entering Twenty-fifth Street. Twenty-fifth is a two way through street. As Cericola approached Thompson Street at a speed of 20 to 25 miles an hour driving far enough away from the west curb to avoid any cars stopped on that side of the street, he looked west for traffic approaching from Thompson Street. Although his view was partly obstructed by cars parked on the north side of Thompson Street, he could see 40 to 50 feet into that street. Seeing no vehicles approaching, he continued into the intersection. After entering the intersection he noticed defendant's automobile then only 4 or 5 feet from him approaching at about 30 or 35 miles per hour. Defendant's car struck the right rear of Cericola's car, when it was about 10 feet from the west curb line of Twenty-fifth Street extended and about the middle of the intersecting Thompson Street.
It is contended by the defendant Redmon that there is no evidence that he was negligent and that Cericola was guilty of contributory negligence because he did not see the Redmon car until it was four or five feet away from him.
From the testimony we think the jury could infer that Redmon did not stop before entering Twenty-fifth Street as he was required by law to do. The jury could well conclude that it would be impossible for him to ...