Bier v. Standard Mfg. Co.

Citations

• 130 Pa. 446
• 18 A. 637
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 1209

Syllabus

<p>1. In an action by an employee against bis employer, to recover damages for personal injuries caused by tbe fall of an elevator, when it was shown that the elevator was an old one, fitted with an old rope which had once parted, and that twice before the elevator had fallen, the case is one for the jury.</p> <p>2. In such an action, it was not error to admit the testimony of an elevator builder, that an elevator, running with a five eighths rope and used to transport iron weighing a ton, and passengers also, the witness would regard as unsafe, without a safety rope and other safety appliances.</p> <p>3. Nor was it error to refuse to charge that unless the defect in the machinery was known to the defendant company, the plaintiff could not recover. The proposition was too broad. If they should have known it, and if by the exercise of ordinary care they would have known it, it was sufficient.</p>