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.

LESOON v. YELLOW CAB COMPANY PITTSBURGH. (06/15/61)

June 15, 1961

LESOON, APPELLANT,
v.
YELLOW CAB COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH.



Appeal, No. 265, April T., 1960, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, April T., 1957, No. 2300, in case of Louise Lesoon v. Yellow Cab Company of Pittsburgh. Judgment affirmed.

COUNSEL

Stanley W. Greenfield, with him George S. Goldstein, for appellant.

David J. Armstrong, with him Dickie, McCamey, Chilcote & Robinson, for defendant, appellee.

Carl W. Brueck, with him Carl W. Brueck, Jr., for additional defendant, appellee.

Before Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ. (rhodes, P.j., absent).

Author: Wright

[ 195 Pa. Super. Page 472]

OPINION BY WRIGHT, J.

In the early evening of January 22, 1957, Louise Lesoon was a passenger in a taxicab of the Yellow Cab Company of Pittsburgh, hereinafter referred to as the Company. The operator of the cab was Darwin Wallace. At the intersection of Monitor Street and Beechwood Boulevard in the City of Pittsburgh, there was a collision between the cab and an automobile operated by Edward W. Bell. Mrs. Lesoon instituted a trespass action against the Company, which joined Bell as additional defendant. Following a four-day trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Bell, and a verdict in favor of the plaintiff against the Company in the amount of $55.00. Plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial and the Company filed a motion for judgment n.o.v., both of which motions were refused by the court en banc. Two judgments were thereafter entered, one on the verdict against the Company in favor of plaintiff in the sum of $55.00, and one on the verdict in favor of Bell and against the Company. Plaintiff has appealed.

At the time of the collision, appellant was thirty-nine years of age and was employed as the manager of a dress shop in East Liberty. She had boarded the cab at Penn and Highland Avenues, intending to go to a church in Homestead. Beechwood Boulevard is a through street running generally north and south. Monitor Street runs generally east and west. Bell was

[ 195 Pa. Super. Page 473]

    proceeding north on Beechwood Boulevard. Wallace was proceeding west on Monitor Street, intending to make a left turn. The only eyewitnesses to the collision were appellant, Wallace and Bell. Appellant testified that the taxicab did not stop at the intersection but pulled out into the northbound traffic lanes of Beechwood Boulevard and then stopped. She further testified that she told Wallace he was blocking traffic and requested him to move forward or back, but that he failed to do either. Wallace testified that he had plenty of time to cross the intersection ahead of Bell, but heard appellant scream and jammed on his brakes. Bell testified that he was traveling at a speed of fifteen to twenty miles per hour; that the cab was "slowing up like it was going to stop", but came out a Monitor Street without stopping; cut sharply to the south; and "sideswiped my driver's side". Following the collision, representatives of the Company took appellant to the Homestead Hospital where she was examined and released without treatment of any kind. After seeing her brother-in-law, Dr. Shakir T. Ilyas, she went to church, as was her original intention.

On this appeal, appellant advances two contentions, the second of which will be first disposed of because it merits only brief consideration. It is argued that Bell "was clearly guilty of negligence", and that the verdict in his favor was against the law and the evidence. Appellant's position is that Bell's testimony established that he did not yield the right-of-way, as required by Section 1013 of The Vehicle Code.*fn1 However, our review of the record indicates ...


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.