Heckle v. Southern Pacific Co.

Citations

• 123 Cal. 441
• 56 P. 56
• 1899 Cal. LEXIS 1093

Syllabus

<p>Action for Death—Evidence—Declarations of Deceased—Res Gestas. In an action for a death, where it appeared that the deceased had been caught under a wheel of one of the ears, and was still under the wheel, held there firmly by the weight of the car, at the time of malting the declaration sought to be proved, it is error to refuse to permit questions to be asked as to what he said while in that condition and what he said as to the cause of the accident; but if the answer given should disclose that what he said as to the cause of the accident, was in its nature a mere narrative of past events, it should be stricken out as not being part of the res gestae.</p> <p>Id.—Test of Res Gesta:—Narrative of Past Events—Application of Principles to Facts.—A declaration, to be admissible as part of the res gestae, must be an undesigned part or incident of the occurrence in question, and must be the natural and spontaneous outgrowth of the main occurrence. It must exclude the notion of deliberation, or calculation, or design to make evidence for future purposes; and if it be a narrative of past events, it is inadmissible hearsay, and must be excluded. The difficult task is always to apply established principles to the facts of the case in hand.</p> <p>Id.—Erroneous Instructions—Burden of Proof—Knowledge of Defendant as to Defective Crossing—Contributory Negligence.— It is erroneous to instruct the jury that plaintiff must establish by a preponderance of evidence “that the defendant had no notice or knowledge that the crossing was out of repair, and that such absence of knowledge was not due to defendant’s neglect in examining the crossing”; and it is also erroneous to instruct the jury that “plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of evidence that the deceased was free from contributory negligence.”</p>