Waterhouse v. Jos. Schlitz Brewing Co.

Citations

• 16 S.D. 592
• 94 N.W. 587
• 1903 S.D. LEXIS 128

Syllabus

<p>1. In an action for personal injuries caused by tbe fall of a building, where the conjplaint merely alleged that plaintiff was lawfully in front of the building, and the answer denied this, there was no issue as to plaintiff’s precise position at the time of the accident.</p> <p>2. The owner of a leased building, who has not used ordinary care in discovering its dangerous condition, is liable for injuries caused by its collapse, though the lease contained no covenant to repair.</p> <p>3. Error cannot be predicated on the overruling of an objection to a question which was not answered.</p> <p>4. In an action for injuries caused by the fall of a building, the question whether witness knew what kind of materials should be used in the construction of buildings similar to the one in question was proper, for the purpose of qualifying him as an expert.</p> <p>5. The overruling of an objection to a question is not prejudicial to the objecting party where the answer given is totally irresponsive, and there is no motion to strike out.</p> <p>6. In an action for personal injuries caused by the fall of a building, a description of the materials and methods usually employed in constructing buildings similar to the one involved was relevant and material.</p> <p>7. The determination of the trial court as to the qualification of an expert witness should not be reversed in the absence of palpable error.</p> <p>8. Alleged error in the overruling of an objection to testimony cannot be considered where no exception is taken.</p> <p>9. In an action for personal injuries caused by the collapse of a building, evidence that other similar buildings had previously fallen was admissible on the question of notice.</p> <p>10. Refusal of requested instructions substantially covered by those given * on the court’s own motion is not error.</p> <p>11. In an action for personal injuries caused by the collapse of a building, an instruction that defendant was not liable unless there was something i