Long v. St. Clair Borough
253 Pa. 92
Pa.1916Check TreatmentUnder the evidence presented by the plaintiff there was a presumption that the defendant had been negligent: Alexander v. Nanticoke Light Co., 209 Pa. 571; Delahunt v. United Telephone & Telegraph Co., 215 Pa. 241; and this presumption was not so clearly overcome that the defendant’s point asking that a verdict be directed in its favor ought to have been affirmed. Nothing in the assignments o£ error calls for a retrial of the case, and the judgment is, therefore, affirmed.