Skip to main content
· 3/31/1902

Choctaw, O. & G. R. v. Holloway

Citations

  • 114 F. 458
  • 52 C.C.A. 260
  • 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 4111

Syllabus

<p>1. Negligence of Master — Ordinary Care.</p> <p>It is error to instruct a jury that it is the duty of the master to provide reasonably safe appliances, tools, or working places for his servants, or to keep them in a reasonably safe condition of repair. The limit of . the duty of the master is to exercise ordinary and reasonable care, having regard to the hazards of the service, to provide his employes with reasonably safe appliances, machinery, tools, and working places, and to exercise ordinary and reasonable care to keep them in a reasonably safe condition of repair.1</p> <p>2. Error — Prejudice Presumed from.</p> <p>The legal presumption is that error produces prejudice. It is only when it appears beyond all doubt from the record that the error complained of did not prejudice and could not have prejudiced the complaining party that the rule that error without prejudice is no ground for reversal is applicable.</p> <p>8. Error without Prejudice.</p> <p>Where the court rightly charges the jury, on the conceded facts, that the master was negligent, as a matter of law, an erroneous charge relative to the degree of care required of the master appears beyond all doubt to be error without prejudice, because no question of the negligence of the master was submitted to the jury for their determination.</p> <p>4. Master and Servant — Duty of Servant — Assumption of Risk.</p> <p>The servant assumes all the ordinary risks of the employment which are known to him, and which would have been known, by the exercise of ordinary care, to a person of reasonable prudence and diligence in his situation. It is his duty to exercise ordinary care and diligence to observe and become cognizant of obvious defects in the machinery and working place; and lie is chargeable with a knowledge and assumption of the risk of all such defects which are known to him, or which would have been known by the use of ordinary care to a person of reasonable prudence and diligence in his situation.2</p> <p

Judges: Cardweee, Sanborn, Thayer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.