Skip to main content
· 5/17/1911

Pauza v. Lehigh Valley Coal Co.

Citations

  • 231 Pa. 577
  • 80 A. 1126
  • 1911 Pa. LEXIS 888

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Damages—Mortality tables — Evidence—Capitalisation of future payments.</p> <p>1. When mortality tables are introduced into evidence it is the duty of the trial judge to instruct the jury that the tables are not to be accepted as establishing the expectancy of the life of the injured party, but only as an aid in arriving at what that expectancy might be in view of all the conditions surrounding the particular life in question. Such conditions are to be considered as the party’s prior state of health, character and habits, perils of employment, personal characteristics and other circumstances surrounding his own life.</p> <p>2. When future payments are to be capitalized in a verdict, the plaintiff is only entitled to their present worth, and the jury should have such guidance from the court as will give them an intelligent understanding of what this means.</p> <p>Evidence — Hearsay—Cross-examination—Striking out evidence.</p> <p>3. Where a witness has testified that an act was done by a particular person, but on cross-examination admits that he had learned from other parties that the act was done by the person he had named, it is the duty of the court to strike out the testimony offered in chief, as hearsay evidence.</p> <p>Negligence — Master and servant — Mines and mining — Safe appliances.</p> <p>4. Where in an action to recover damages for personal injuries, it appears that the negligence complained of was the leaving of a trolley line unguarded, and the evidence is that the electric system was of the usual and ordinary character in general use in mines, and that it had been properly installed, it is reversible error for the trial judge to charge that “it is the province of this jury to use your judgment as reasonable men, as to what is a proper installation and construction of a dangerous appliance under all the circumstances and conditions as testified to you, in that tunnel.”</p> <p>5. An employer is not bound to provide the safest machinery or

Judges: Elkin, Fell, Mestrezat, Moschzisker, Potter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.