Court Opinion

ID: 9750506
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 15:03:06.552451+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:26:11.349446
License: Public Domain

McEWEN, Judge,
dissenting:
While my distinguished colleagues of the majority have expressed with clarity a very thoughtful rationale of position, there is no question in my mind but that the jury should have been permitted to find that the City of Bethlehem had a duty to the decedent. As a result, I am, very respectfully, compelled to dissent and to reecho the view expressed by our learned President Judge Edmund B. Spaeth, Jr. that:
... the jury could properly find that the city had a duty of reasonable care for the safety of travelers at the intersection; that in the exercise of that duty the city should have foreseen that when the intersection was flooded, a traveler might drown; that in failing to do *549anything to alleviate that danger, the city failed to fulfill its duty; and that its failure caused appellee’s death.
DEL SOLE, J., joins.