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.

FRANGIS v. DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY (02/27/75)

decided: February 27, 1975.

FRANGIS, APPELLANT,
v.
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY



Appeal from order of Court of Common Pleas, Civil Division, of Allegheny County, Oct. T., 1970, No. 1816, in case of Nicholas W. Frangis v. Duquesne Light Company, a corporation.

COUNSEL

Francis A. Muracca, for appellant.

Robert E. Wayman, with him James A. Wood, and Wayman, Irvin, Trushel & McAuley, for appellee.

Watkins, P. J., Jacobs, Hoffman, Cercone, Price, Van der Voort, and Spaeth, JJ. Opinion by Hoffman, J. Jacobs, J., concurs in the result.

Author: Hoffman

[ 232 Pa. Super. Page 421]

Nicholas Frangis, plaintiff below, appeals from the lower court's denial of his motion to remove a judgment of compulsory non-suit.

In the early afternoon of April 23, 1969, the appellant was driving his automobile in a westerly direction on Route 30 in Allegheny County, and allegedly collided with a utility pole owned by the appellee, Duquesne Light Co.*fn1 At the scene of the accident, Route 30 consists of three lanes in each direction, separated by a grassy and dirt medial area. The utility pole was located within the medial area, approximately ten inches from the highway. The appellant testified that he was travelling at approximately 30 miles per hour in the extreme left-hand lane when he collided with the pole.

All of the witnesses called on behalf of the appellant testified that it was raining on the date of the accident,

[ 232 Pa. Super. Page 422]

    and all agreed that the car came to rest on the divider strip with its wheels in the air. John Coyne, a tractor-trailer driver, testified that he was driving in the same direction as the appellant and viewed the occurrence through his rear view mirror. Coyne testified that he saw an "automobile travelling end over end like front to rear coming down the fast lane of the roadway, and it finally come to rest against the pole and bounced back on the ground." Officer Wood testified that the pole located at the point the car was found was bent "at the ground level at an angle." John Barsala, another eyewitness, testified that he was travelling on the other side of the highway. He corroborated Coyne's testimony that the car was "flipping", struck a utility pole, and bounced back to the ground. Significantly, Barsala contradicted the appellant's statement that he was driving in the left-hand lane, and had never changed lanes:

"Q. What lane was the automobile travelling?

A. When I first noticed the car, there was only two lanes coming on that little bridge. He would be over in the right-hand lane and ...


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.