Patton v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• affirming dismissal of claim that defendant had negligently designed a swimming pool for want of expert testimony
• affirming dismissal of claim that defendant had negligently designed a swimming pool for want of expert testimony
• average juror’s experience with diving board does not equip juror with ability to assess particular variables that lead to reasonably safe diving conditions
• jurors could not assess whether particular diving conditions rendered backyard swimming pool unreasonably dangerous without expert testimony
• “Expert testimony is required whenever the matter to be determined is so distinctly related to some science, profession, business or occupation as to be beyond the ken of the average layman.”
• plaintiff was injured while diving in defendant’s backyard swimming pool

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).