grievous error in Pennsylvania

1967In Murphy v. Bernheim & Sons, Inc., 327 Pa. 285 , 194 A. 194 (1937), we said: “When one is moving in the dark he must proceed with the greatest caution and literally ‘feel his way around.’ ” In Murray v. Earl, 282 Pa. 517, 520 , 128 A. 436 (1925), we said: “ ‘Where the entrance is dark, it would seem that ordinary care would condemn the act of a person who steps into an elevator shaft [knowing its location] without satisfying himself that the elevator is there.’ ” As we said in Bailey v. Alexander Realty Co., 342 Pa. 362 , 20 A. 2d 754 (1941) : “The grievous error which plaintiff made was in a

1967In Murphy v. Bernheim & Sons, Inc., 327 Pa. 285 , 194 A. 194 (1937), we said: “When one is moving in the dark he must proceed with the greatest caution and literally ‘feel his way around.’ ” In Murray v. Earl, 282 Pa. 517, 520 , 128 A. 436 (1925), we said: “ ‘Where the entrance is dark, it would seem that ordinary care would condemn the act of a person who steps into an elevator shaft [knowing its location] without satisfying himself that the elevator is there.’ ” As we said in Bailey v. Alexander Realty Co., 342 Pa. 362 , 20 A. 2d 754 (1941) : “The grievous error which plaintiff made was in a

2021Id.

1967In Murphy v. Bernheim & Sons, Inc., 327 Pa. 285 , 194 A. 194 (1937), we said: “When one is moving in the dark he must proceed with the greatest caution and literally ‘feel his way around.’ ” In Murray v. Earl, 282 Pa. 517, 520 , 128 A. 436 (1925), we said: “ ‘Where the entrance is dark, it would seem that ordinary care would condemn the act of a person who steps into an elevator shaft [knowing its location] without satisfying himself that the elevator is there.’ ” As we said in Bailey v. Alexander Realty Co., 342 Pa. 362 , 20 A. 2d 754 (1941) : “The grievous error which plaintiff made was in a

1967In Murphy v. Bernheim & Sons, Inc., 327 Pa. 285 , 194 A. 194 (1937), we said: “When one is moving in the dark he must proceed with the greatest caution and literally ‘feel his way around.’ ” In Murray v. Earl, 282 Pa. 517, 520 , 128 A. 436 (1925), we said: “ ‘Where the entrance is dark, it would seem that ordinary care would condemn the act of a person who steps into an elevator shaft [knowing its location] without satisfying himself that the elevator is there.’ ” As we said in Bailey v. Alexander Realty Co., 342 Pa. 362 , 20 A. 2d 754 (1941) : “The grievous error which plaintiff made was in a

1967In Murphy v. Bernheim & Sons, Inc., 327 Pa. 285 , 194 A. 194 (1937), we said: “When one is moving in the dark he must proceed with the greatest caution and literally ‘feel his way around.’ ” In Murray v. Earl, 282 Pa. 517, 520 , 128 A. 436 (1925), we said: “ ‘Where the entrance is dark, it would seem that ordinary care would condemn the act of a person who steps into an elevator shaft [knowing its location] without satisfying himself that the elevator is there.’ ” As we said in Bailey v. Alexander Realty Co., 342 Pa. 362 , 20 A. 2d 754 (1941) : “The grievous error which plaintiff made was in a

1967In Murphy v. Bernheim & Sons, Inc., 327 Pa. 285 , 194 A. 194 (1937), we said: “When one is moving in the dark he must proceed with the greatest caution and literally ‘feel his way around.’ ” In Murray v. Earl, 282 Pa. 517, 520 , 128 A. 436 (1925), we said: “ ‘Where the entrance is dark, it would seem that ordinary care would condemn the act of a person who steps into an elevator shaft [knowing its location] without satisfying himself that the elevator is there.’ ” As we said in Bailey v. Alexander Realty Co., 342 Pa. 362 , 20 A. 2d 754 (1941) : “The grievous error which plaintiff made was in a

1949There was no necessity to find toilet accommodations in this case as in Dively v. Penn-Pittsburgh Corporation, 332 Pa. 65 , 2 A. 2d 831 , relied upon by the majority, or evidence of other compelling necessity, and therefore the general rule applies that one who follows an unfamiliar course in the dark or steps into darkened and unfamiliar space and sustains personal injuries is guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law: Conboy v. Osage Tribe No. 113, 288 Pa. 193 , 135 A. 729 ; Barth v. Klinck, 360 Pa. 616, 618 , 62 A. 2d 841 .

1949There was no necessity to find toilet accommodations in this case as in Dively v. Penn-Pittsburgh Corporation, 332 Pa. 65 , 2 A. 2d 831 , relied upon by the majority, or evidence of other compelling necessity, and therefore the general rule applies that one who follows an unfamiliar course in the dark or steps into darkened and unfamiliar space and sustains personal injuries is guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law: Conboy v. Osage Tribe No. 113, 288 Pa. 193 , 135 A. 729 ; Barth v. Klinck, 360 Pa. 616, 618 , 62 A. 2d 841 .

1949There was no necessity to find toilet accommodations in this case as in Dively v. Penn-Pittsburgh Corporation, 332 Pa. 65 , 2 A. 2d 831 , relied upon by the majority, or evidence of other compelling necessity, and therefore the general rule applies that one who follows an unfamiliar course in the dark or steps into darkened and unfamiliar space and sustains personal injuries is guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law: Conboy v. Osage Tribe No. 113, 288 Pa. 193 , 135 A. 729 ; Barth v. Klinck, 360 Pa. 616, 618 , 62 A. 2d 841 .

1949There was no necessity to find toilet accommodations in this case as in Dively v. Penn-Pittsburgh Corporation, 332 Pa. 65 , 2 A. 2d 831 , relied upon by the majority, or evidence of other compelling necessity, and therefore the general rule applies that one who follows an unfamiliar course in the dark or steps into darkened and unfamiliar space and sustains personal injuries is guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law: Conboy v. Osage Tribe No. 113, 288 Pa. 193 , 135 A. 729 ; Barth v. Klinck, 360 Pa. 616, 618 , 62 A. 2d 841 .

1949There was no necessity to find toilet accommodations in this case as in Dively v. Penn-Pittsburgh Corporation, 332 Pa. 65 , 2 A. 2d 831 , relied upon by the majority, or evidence of other compelling necessity, and therefore the general rule applies that one who follows an unfamiliar course in the dark or steps into darkened and unfamiliar space and sustains personal injuries is guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law: Conboy v. Osage Tribe No. 113, 288 Pa. 193 , 135 A. 729 ; Barth v. Klinck, 360 Pa. 616, 618 , 62 A. 2d 841 .

1949There was no necessity to find toilet accommodations in this case as in Dively v. Penn-Pittsburgh Corporation, 332 Pa. 65 , 2 A. 2d 831 , relied upon by the majority, or evidence of other compelling necessity, and therefore the general rule applies that one who follows an unfamiliar course in the dark or steps into darkened and unfamiliar space and sustains personal injuries is guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law: Conboy v. Osage Tribe No. 113, 288 Pa. 193 , 135 A. 729 ; Barth v. Klinck, 360 Pa. 616, 618 , 62 A. 2d 841 .

1943Even if appellant had the right of way at the intersection as he claims, he should not have gone forward and entered the crossing blindly and without performing his duty to look and continue to look for approaching traffic, of which he had full knowledge: Shapiro v. Grabosky, 320 Pa. 556 , 184 A. 83 .

1943Even if appellant had the right of way at the intersection as he claims, he should not have gone forward and entered the crossing blindly and without performing his duty to look and continue to look for approaching traffic, of which he had full knowledge: Shapiro v. Grabosky, 320 Pa. 556 , 184 A. 83 .