Patton v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co.

Citations

• 179 U.S. 658
• 21 S. Ct. 275
• 45 L. Ed. 361
• 1901 U.S. LEXIS 1276

Syllabus

<p>The plaintiff, an employé of the railway company, was injured while at work for it.. With reference to his contention that the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant, and in failing to leave the question of negligence to the jury, this court, after stating the facts, said:</p> <p>(1) That while in the case of a passenger, the fact of an accident carries with it a presumption of negligence on the part of the carrier, a presumption which, in the absence of some explanation or proof to the contrary is sufficient to sustain a verdict against him, a different rule obtains as to an employé. The fact of accident carries with it no presumption of negligence on the part of the employer, and it is .an affirmative fact for the injured employé to establish, that the employer has been guilty of negligence:</p> <p>(2) That in the latter case it is not sufficient for the employé to show that the employer may have been guilty of negligence, but the evidence must point to the fact that he was; and where the testimony leaves the matter uncertain, and shows, that any one of half a dozen things may have brought about the injury, for some of which the employer is responsible, and for some of which he is not, it is not for the jury to guess between these half a dozen causes, and find that the negligence of the employer was the real cause when there is no satisfactory foundation in the testimony for that conclusion:</p> <p>(3) That while the employer is bound to provide a safe place and safe'machinery in which and with which the employé is to work, and while this is a positive duty resting upon him, and one which he may not avoid by turning it over to some employé, it is also true that there is no guaranty by the employer that the place and machinery shall be absolutely safe. Se is bound to take reasonable care and make reasonable effort, and the greater the risk which attends the work to be done and the machinery to be used, the more imperative is the obligation re