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.

JOHNSON v. PEOPLES FIRST NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY. (11/10/58)

November 10, 1958

JOHNSON, APPELLANT,
v.
PEOPLES FIRST NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY.



Appeal, No. 135, March T., 1958, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Washington County, Nov. T., 1957, No. 123, in case of Maude E. Johnson v. Peoples First National Bank and Trust Company, executor. Judgment reversed.

COUNSEL

August L. Sismondo, with him Vincent R. Massock, for appellant.

Francis H. Patrono, for appellee.

Before Jones, C.j., Bell, Musmanno, Jones and Cohen, JJ.

Author: Jones

[ 394 Pa. Page 117]

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE BENJAMIN R. JONES.

This appeal presents a question of first impression in this Court. Can a widow maintain a trespass action against her deceased husband's personal representative to recover damages for personal injuries received by

[ 394 Pa. Page 118]

    her as the result of the husband's negligent operation of a motor vehicle which negligent conduct occurred during coverture?

Maude E. Johnson, appellant, on September 23, 1957, instituted in the Court of Common Pleas of Washington County a trespass action against Peoples First National Bank and Trust Company, Executor under the last will of Donald Johnson, deceased, appellee, to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by her in an automobile accident which allegedly occurred as the result of her deceased husband's negligent operation of an automobile in which she was a passenger.*fn1 To appellant's complaint appellee filed preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer raising four objections: (1) that appellant was suing her deceased husband's estate; (2) that during her husband's lifetime she had no cause of action against him; (3) that appellant has no cause of action against his estate which survived his death and (4) inasmuch as she could not sue him if he were alive she can not bring this action against his personal representative by reason of the provisions of § 603 of the Fiduciaries Act of April 18, 1949, P.L. 512, 20 PS § 320.603.

The Court below, with one judge dissenting, sustained appellee's preliminary objections and entered judgment for defendant. From the entry of such judgment this appeal was taken.

In Pennsylvania, as in many other states, the rule is that one spouse cannot ...


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.