Hughes v. Fayette Manufacturing Co.

Citations

• 214 Pa. 282
• 63 A. 692
• 1906 Pa. LEXIS 642

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Master and servant — Dangerous machine — Notice ip employer.</p> <p>Where an employee in a brick manufacturing establishment notices sparks flying from a wheel at which he is at work, and also that the wheel makes a screeching noise, and he complains to the superintendent that he does not like the looks of things, and the superintendent tells him to go ahead with his work, that there is no danger, and that he, the superintendent, would have the wheel fixed, the employer will be liable for personal injuries sustained by the employee by the subsequent breaking of the wheel while the employee continues to work at it.</p> <p>A servant is not entitled to have his ease submitted to the jury, unless he introduces, in addition to the fact of the occurrence of the accident, some specific testimony which fairly tends to show that the employer was guilty of negligence. In the absence of such testimony the case must obviously fall within the operation of the principle that an action is not maintainable where the plaintiff’s evidence is equally consistent with the absence or with the existence of negligence. This rule, however, does not imply that it is only from direct evidence that the master’s culpability can be inferred. The burden of proof is satisfied by the production of circumstantial evidence.</p>