Wagner v. H. W. Jayne Chemical Co.

Citations

• 147 Pa. 475
• 23 A. 772
• 1892 Pa. LEXIS 876

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Risk of employment — Injuries by fumes.</p> <p>In an action to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by inhaling fumes of nitric acid, testimony on behalf of the plaintiff tended to show that he was a common laborer empl oyed on outside work of defendant’s establishment, that he was ordered by defendant’s superintendent to do some work in connection with the process of making dinitro-benzole; that poisonous fumes were evolved by this process; that experiencing discomfort from them he left the work, declaring that “ he could not stand it; ” that the superintendent assured him that the fumes would not hurt him, and ordered him to return to his work; that he obeyed the order, but was soon obliged to go home seriously ill; that he had no previous knowledge of the danger to which he was exposed, and was not warned of them by his employer. Expert testimony was conflicting as to whether plaintiff’s illness was or could have been produced by the fumes. There was some evidence that plaintiff had knowledge that the fumes of nitric acid were dangerous. It also.appeared that they were disagreeably apparent to the senses. Held, that it was proper to submit the case to the jury on the question of defendant’s negligence. Held also, that there was not such evidence of contributory negligence as would justify the court in directing a verdict for defendant: Beittenmiller'v. Brewing Co., 22 W. N. 33, distinguished.</p>