Court Opinion

ID: 9703780
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 00:07:31.454565+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:51.633593
License: Public Domain

Concurring Opinion by
Wright, J.:
Although this is a close case, I concur in the result. The instant factual situation differs from that in Angelo v. Pittsburgh, Railways Co., 189 Pa. Superior Ct. 571, 151 A. 2d 867, in which we are filing an opinion this same day. In the Angelo case it was conceded that the bus had made a violent and unusual stop, affecting not only the plaintiff but other passengers as well. We held that the evidence was sufficient to raise a presumption of negligence. In the case at bar, however, the record does not disclose that the movement of the bus was so unusual and extraordinary *56as to be beyond reasonable anticipation, and passengers other than the plaintiff were not affected.