Finkbeiner v. Solomon

Citations

• 225 Pa. 333
• 74 A. 170
• 1909 Pa. LEXIS 660

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Dynamite—Infant—Proximate cause — Nonsuit.</p> <p>In an action to recover damages for personal injuries to a boy nine years old, it appeared that the injury was the result of an explosion of. dynamite caps. Some time prior to the accident the plaintiff, who was the father of the boy, purchased from defendant a lot of land, and also a frame bam on another lot. He subsequently moved the barn on to the lot which he purchased, and in doing so carried along in the barn some of the effects of the defendant. Subsequently he notified the defendant that he would need the barn, and the latter moved out the greater part of his effects, leaving only a few small items. A few days afterwards while the plaintiff’s son and some other children were playing in the barn, a much younger child than the boy injured found upon a dark shelf in the bam a tin box containing dynamite caps. The older boy took the caps, and while attempting with a stone to drive a nail through one of them the cap exploded, and the boy was severely injured. Held, (1) that the injury was not the proximate result of the act of the defendant in leaving the caps in the barn, but was caused by the unrelated act of a third party; (2) that the leaving of the caps upon a dark shelf in the bam was not in itself a negligent act; (3) that it was the duty of the plaintiff in taking possession of the building and moving it upon his own lot to inspect its contents and remove anything dangerous before permitting his children to use it.</p>