Campbell v. Wells Bros.

Citations

• 256 Pa. 446
• 100 A. 1050
• 1917 Pa. LEXIS 633

Syllabus

<p>Hegligence — Master and servant — Building construction — Iron worker — Raising derrick — Insufficient flooring — Fall—Evidence— Experts — Foreman—Act of June 10, 1907, P. L. 528.</p> <p>1. In an action against a construction company to recover for the death of plaintiff’s decedent, an employee of defendant, who fell from the third floor of a building where he was engaged in hoisting the mast of a derrick, where the accident was alleged to have been caused by the negligence of defendant in failing to furnish sufficient planks to cover the part of the floor where decedent was working, testimony of a fellow workman engaged on the same floor, describing the conditions existing at the foot of the derrick where the plaintiff was working and stating that there were not sufficient planks to cover -the floor, was competent, and the exclusion of such evidence was reversible error.</p> <p>2. Where there is ample testimony to show that a certain employee of the defendant was in charge of the gang of men who were raising the derrick and was present during, and personally directed, the laying of the planking around the foot of the derrick, such employee is within the Act of June 10, 1907, P. L. 523, relating to the liability of a master for the negligence of a vice-principal, and his employers are responsible for his negligence,</p> <p>3. In such case, it-was competent for plaintiff to show that the method used by the defendant in raising the derrick .through the third floor was unusual and more dangerous in itself than the customary method, and the testimony of experts, who have duly qualified themselves to testify, was admissible for such purpose, but the expert should be asked his opinion, and not to make a comparison between conditions supposed to be similar in two building operations.</p> <p>Evidence — Purpose not clear — Offer of proof.</p> <p>4. Where a question put to a witness does not clearly disclose the purpose of the testimony, counsel should make a formal offer