Judicial+-+Evans

Title & Citation Evans v. Philadelphia Transportation Co. Supreme Court of Pa. (212 A. 2nd 440), 1965

Facts of the Case
 * F.J. McFarlaine entered the @nd St Station of the Market St Subway of PTC, paod a fee, and entered upon the platform provided for westbound trains
 * Inexplicably fell on the subway tracks and was struck by a westbound train, sustaining very serious personal injuries
 * McFarlaine had worked that day, consumed 1.5 beers in a tavers, and was intoxicated when entering the station but there was no smell of alcohol or any other symptom of intoxication when brought to the hospital immediately after the accident
 * McFarlaine instituted a tresspass action against PTC
 * Now deceased, a personal representative was substituted as plaintiff of record
 * Complaint amemded to cite the accident as the cause of death
 * Verdict returned in favor of the personal representative and against PTC in the amount of $93,50.
 * Motion for JNOV filed - A "**motion for [|judgment] //n.o.v.//**" (//[|non obstante veredicto]//, or notwithstanding the [|verdict]) asks the court to reverse the [|jury]'s verdict on the grounds that the jury could not reasonably have reached such a verdict. This motion is made after the jury's verdict. If granted, the court enters a new verdict. This motion can be used in a criminal case only to reverse a guilty verdict; not guilty verdicts are immune to reversal by the court. - DISMISSED
 * Did not voluntarily lie of tracks
 * Was not trespassing - Legal obligation to trespassers is avoidance of wanton or willful misconduct
 * Not invited on the tracks, thus not anticipated to be there
 * Rule (Frederick v. PRTC; Galne v. PRRC): Was the evidence sufficient to warrant a finding of wanton misconduct on the part of the defendant which was the proximate cause of the accident? (Found that it was)
 * Motion for new trial filed - DISMISSED
 * Appeal was filed by PTC
 * Eyewittness: W.R. Forsythe, operator of subway train
 * Testified that the trian was coasting at 10 mph, the platform area was well lighted, the headlight illuminated the track at least 200 feet ahead, did not realize that a human was on the tracks until the last moment, too late to stop and avoid the accident
 * In a second portion of the testimony Forsythe admitted to seeing an object lying between the rails when the train was still 88 feet in the distance
 * Then stated that he first saw the object when he rounded the curve leading to the station platform from a distance of 168 feet away
 * Whether 88 or 168 ft, both distances were far enough away to stop safely before striking the decedent ( Could have stopped only 24 to 38 ft away
 * Did not stop at all - carried on untill 65 to 70 feet of the train had passed over the decedents body. Did wanton misconduct exist?