194 A. 749 | Pa. Super. Ct. | 1937
Argued October 27, 1937.
These appeals are governed in principle by the cases of Maltzv. Carter,
The facts in the present case are more favorable to *53 the plaintiffs than those cited, for here there was evidence that the driver, while the car was in motion, diverted his attention from the road and reached down to do something on the floor of the car, and while he was looking and reaching downwards the car swerved to the left and went across the road and ran into the pole injuring the minor plaintiff. This was sufficient to take the case to the jury.
The explanation given by the defendant on the trial was that a tire blew out causing the car to run into the pole; but this did not accord with his statements immediately following the occurrence and evidently was not believed by the jury. The case was clearly for the jury.
The refusal of the trial judge to enter a compulsory nonsuit is not assignable as error: Morgan v. Duquesne Boro.,
The judgments are affirmed.