Franklin v. Engel

Citations

• 34 Wash. 480
• 76 P. 84
• 1904 Wash. LEXIS 375

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Dangerous Premises — Trap Door — Notice—Evidence op Warning Given to Others. In an action for personal injuries caused by failing through a trap door, maintained by the proprietor of a restaurant in dangerous proximity to the place provided for customers’ hats and coats, evidence that on a previous occasion defendant had warned another customer about approaching the hole is admissible as descriptive of 'the place and to show defendant’s actual knowledge o£ the danger.</p> <p>Evidence — Diagram of Premises. In an action for negligence in the maintenance of dangerous premises, a plat which is a substantially correct diagram of the situation is admissible to illustrate the testimony of the witness.</p> <p>Negltgence — Comparative—Instruction Endorsing Doctrine of. An instruction that the plaintiff in order to recover need not be wholly free from negligence provided his negligence is slight in comparison with gross negligence of the defendant, is erroneous as an endorsement of the doctrine of comparative negligence.</p>