Citation Numbers: 145 A. 605, 295 Pa. 548
Judges: OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE KEPHART, January 7, 1929:
Filed Date: 11/30/1928
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 1/13/2023
Argued November 30, 1928. It is admitted that the child, under six years of age, was injured by defendant's truck. Just how the accident occurred was the question in the case. Because of the boy's age, there can be no charge of negligence against him. He left the curb to cross the street when the truck and its trailer were 125 feet away. As the car approached, the boy continued on his way across the street. He was in full view of the driver, as there was nothing to obstruct the vision. The boy and the truck reached a place in the street where both were close together.
Where an automobile is being used on a public highway, and the driver sees a child in a place of danger on the highway, and the driver has sufficient time to stop his car if under proper control, it is his duty to exercise such care as would be reasonably necessary to avoid a collision. When children are on the street, or in the act of crossing, plainly visible, his obvious duty on approaching the spot is to bring his car under such control as the circumstances demand, so that, responsive to the child's capricious acts, he can stop to avoid injury: Silberstein v. Showell, Fryer Co.,
The boy endeavored to clear the distance to the other side of the street. He was seen to pass in front of the automobile, and the direct evidence stops at this point. The witnesses, being in the rear of the truck, could not see what happened, the time was so short. The boy was heard to scream almost immediately, and one of the witnesses *Page 550
testified: "Q. Could you tell what part of the truck hit him? A. It must have been the right front, because he got by the left front. Q. How do you know that? A. I saw him pass in front of the left part of the truck." The evidence presents a question clearly for the determination of the jury. As stated in Kuehne v. Brown,
Judgment affirmed. *Page 551
Tatarewicz v. United Traction Co. , 220 Pa. 560 ( 1908 )
Kuehne v. Brown , 257 Pa. 37 ( 1917 )
Bloom v. Whelan , 56 Pa. Super. 277 ( 1914 )
McAvoy v. Kromer , 277 Pa. 196 ( 1923 )
Webster v. Luckow , 219 Iowa 1048 ( 1935 )
Allen v. Des Moines R. Co. , 218 Iowa 286 ( 1934 )
Mosely v. Connor , 318 Pa. 17 ( 1935 )
Whalen, Admrx. v. Yellow Cab Company , 313 Pa. 97 ( 1933 )
Haas v. Wesley , 140 Pa. Super. 453 ( 1940 )
Morris v. Kauffman , 120 Pa. Super. 515 ( 1935 )