Mountain v. American Window Glass Co.

Citations

• 263 Pa. 181
• 106 A. 313
• 1919 Pa. LEXIS 392

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Master and servant — Place of employment — Evidence — Motion for judgment n o. v.</p> <p>1. On a motion by defendant for judgment n. o. v. the testimony should not only be read in the light most advantageous to plaintiff, all conflicts therein being resolved in his favor, but he must be given the benefit of every fact and inference of fact pertaining to the issues involved, which may reasonably be deduced from the evidence.</p> <p>2. It is reversible error for the trial court to base its conclusion that defendant was entitled to judgment n. o. v. upon testimony introduced by both sides, whether it made for or against plaintiff, and, where there was a conflict in the proofs, to draw inferences against the plaintiff which might have been drawn in his favor.</p> <p>3. Where a shifting machinist in a glass works is directed by his foreman to go into an enclosure around a dangerous machine to repair it, and in doing so is injured by the fall of a roller of glass, a judgment for the employer n. o. v. is wrongly entered, where the evidence for the plaintiff tends to show that he knew nothing of glass blowing, that he had never seen a roller fall from its holder; that, although such falls were not infrequent, it was questionable whether plaintiff on account of the noise would or should have known that such breaks were apt to occur; that, when he was ordered to go into the enclosure, he said he would wait until the roller came down, whereupon the foreman said, “there is no' danger; you go in and be ready to fix tbat machine when it comes down,” and that he obeyed and had been standing in the enclosure “a couple of minutes,” when the roller fell and injured him.</p>