Opinion
October 1, 1930.
November 24, 1930.
Negligence — Fall of ladder on street — Pedestrian — Evidence — Case for jury.
In an action by a pedestrian to recover damages caused by a falling ladder owned by defendant, the case is for the jury where the evidence shows that plaintiff was walking on a sidewalk when the accident occurred, that a "strong wind" was blowing at the time, that the wind dislodged from its position a tall ladder belonging to defendant company, which was leaning against the wall of an adjacent building, that, on falling, the ladder struck plaintiff, and that no one was guarding the ladder at the time.
Sakach v. Antonopolos, 298 Pa. 130, cited and applied.
Argued October 1, 1930.
Before MOSCHZISKER, C. J., FRAZER, WALLING, SIMPSON, KEPHART, SADLER and SCHAFFER, JJ.
Appeals, Nos. 101 and 102, March T., 1930, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Allegheny Co., April T., 1928, No. 3591, on verdict for plaintiffs, in case of Anna Hresko and Andrew Hresko, her husband, v. Federal Electric Co., Inc., also known as Federal Sign System (Electric) Co. Affirmed.
Trespass for personal injuries to wife. Before MOORE, J.
The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts.
Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $3,000 and $1,125 respectively. Defendant appealed.
Error assigned, inter alia, was refusal of judgment for defendant n. o. v., quoting record.
E. W. Langfitt, for appellant.
John P. Baker, with him David B. Fawcett, for appellee.
The two plaintiffs, husband and wife, sued to recover damages for physical injuries to the latter. Defendant appeals from judgments on the verdicts in plaintiffs' favor, the sole assignment of error in each case being that there was not sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict, and, therefore, judgment n. o. v. should have been entered for appellant.
On the morning of March 25, 1926, plaintiffs were walking on the sidewalk of a public street in the Borough of Homestead, Allegheny County. A "stormy wind" was blowing and, according to an eyewitness produced by plaintiffs, it dislodged from its position a tall ladder, belonging to defendant company, which had been leaning against the wall of an adjacent building, where the company was engaged in erecting an electric sign. In falling, the end of the ladder next the wall struck and injured the woman plaintiff. No one was guarding the ladder at the time. The question of defendant's negligence was, under the circumstances, properly left to the jury, whose verdict we see no reason to disturb. See Sakach v. Antonopolos, 298 Pa. 130.
The judgments are affirmed.