Schwartz v. Caplan

Citations

• 256 Pa. 239
• 100 A. 800
• 1917 Pa. LEXIS 594

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Master and servant — Unguarded machinery — Bakery — Practicability of guards — Gase'for jury — Contributory negligence, not raised at trial — Instructions to jury, failure to request.</p> <p>1. Where in an action by the employee of a bakery to recover damages for injuries sustained in consequence of plaintiff’s hand being ■ drawn into rolls into which he was pushing dough, it appeared that the rolls were unguarded and the evidence was conflicting as to whether guards could have been placed over the rolls without destroying their efficiency, the case was properly submitted to the jury.</p> <p>2. In such case, it was no defense that in other bakeries like machinery was not guarded.</p> <p>3. The omission to instruct the jury on questions to which the lower court’s attention was not in any manner directed at the trial is not ordinarily reversible error.</p> <p>4. Where, in such case, defendant'did not allege at the trial that plaintiff was guilty of contributory'negligence but in his motion for a new trial alleged plaintiff’s contributory negligence as a defense to the action, it was then too late to set up such defense even if it were meritorious.</p>