Source: http://www.ecases.us/case/c299537/betty-joe-bowman-v-redding-co-inc/
Timestamp: 2019-10-19 18:06:57
Document Index: 587223479

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 294', '§ 483', '§ 496', '§ 433', '§ 433', '§ 20', '§ 41', '§ 433', '§ 9']

Betty Joe Bowman v. Redding & Co., Inc., D.C. Circuit, US Court of Appeals Cases, Federal Courts, COURT CASE
The general rule requires plaintiff in a negligence case to "prove sufficient facts, not only to warrant an inference of negligence, but also to justify an inference that such negligence was proximately related to the injury or death." Pennsylvania R. R. Co. v. Pomeroy, 99 U.S.App.D.C. 272, 281, 239 F.2d 435, 444 (1956), cert. denied, 353 U.S. 950, 77 S. Ct. 861, 1 L. Ed. 2d 859 (1957).6 The trial judge ruled, and Izzo urges on appeal, that the jury could only speculate or conjecture as to whether Williams's behavior was a cause of Bowman's death because Bowman might already have been dead by the time Williams first saw him pinned between the hoist and the ramp. The same defense, if sound, would be applicable to Redding insofar as its liability is predicated on the act of the hoist operator.
"The federal rule, as we understand it, leaves the trier of fact free to rely on that presumption if the known circumstances are not strong enough for an affirmative finding that death occurred at some specific time." Acosta v. United States, 320 F.2d 382, 384, 162 Ct. Cl. 631, (1963). See 22 Am.Jur.2d, Death § 294 n. 9 (1965) for state cases. Acosta, like most of the presumption of life cases. dealt with the legal effect of a lengthy, unexplained disappearance. But the presumption has vitality in other areas. For example, in American Sugar Refining Co. v. Ned, 209 F.2d 636 (5th Cir. 1954), the deceased fell from a barge into the water after having complained of feeling sick. The court rejected the employer's contention that decedent might have died as a result of his illness, saying (209 F.2d at 638):
The guiding principle is exemplified, in another "elevator" case, by our decision in Munsey v. Webb, 37 App.D.C. 185 (1911), aff'd, 231 U.S. 150, 34 S. Ct. 44, 58 L. Ed. 162 (1913). In that case deceased was riding in defendant's elevator and suddenly reeled and fell, for no apparent reason. The elevator door had been negligently left open so that his head stuck out over the edge of the car after the fall and was crushed between the floor of the car and a projecting floor. Defendant put it that deceased may have been dead as a result of his prior reeling and fall, before his head was crushed as a result of defendant's negligence. This court said (37 App.D.C. at 193):
The leading case in our jurisdiction on the significance and legal consequences of violation of safety regulations is Ross v. Hartman, 78 U.S.App. D.C. 217, 139 F.2d 14, 158 A.L.R. 1370 (1943), cert. denied, 321 U.S. 790, 64 S. Ct. 790, 88 L. Ed. 1080 (1944). In the Ross case the defendant left his keys in his truck after parking it in a public alley. A thief drove the truck away and within two hours ran down the plaintiff. In discussing the former District of Columbia regulation on locking the ignition, the court said:
Other courts have held that the defenses of contributory negligence and assumption of risk are still available unless the violated statute specifically precludes them. See Annot., 171 A.L.R. 894 (1947), 10 A.L.R. 2d 853 (1950). Compare Restatement (Second) of Torts, § 483 (contributory negligence) with § 496 F (assumption of risk) (1965).
A leading commentator concludes that the essential inquiry, assuming that the plaintiff is a member of the protected class, is to determine the scope of the intended protection and to decide if the fundamental purpose of the statute or regulation would be defeated if plaintiff is permitted to assume the risk or if his contributory negligence can bar his action. See W. Prosser, The Law of Torts, 435-436 (contributory negligence), 468 (assumption of risk) (3d Ed., 1964) See also, Annot. 34 A.L.R. 2d 1366, 1376 (1954) for safety regulation cases involving elevators and Annot. 17 A.L.R. 2d 637, 645 (1951) for similar cases involving window washers.
See Annot. 21 A.L.R. 3d 418, 426-429 (1968).
The rule of subsection (3) is derived from the noted California case of Summers v. Tice, 33 Cal. 2d 80, 199 P.2d 1 (1948)See 40 ALI Proceedings 295 ff. (1963); Restatement (Second) of Torts § 433B, Illustration 9 (1965). There the plaintiff was injured by bird shot pellets when the two defendants with whom he was hunting simultaneously but not in concert negligently fired their weapons in his direction. The court ruled:
The approach of Summers v. Tice is in accord with a number of other cases we have examined, including cases where the plaintiff was not a member of the hunting party. The citations are available in 3 Appendix, Restatement (Second) of Torts, § 433B (Illustration 9) at 144 (1966); 2 Harper & James, The Law of Torts § 20.2 at 1116 n. 24 (1956); W. Prosser, The Law of Torts, § 41 at 247 (1964); Annot. 5 A.L.R. 2d 98, 99-100 (1949).
Another typical fact situation presenting the same problem is the multiple automobile collision, where, after an initial negligently caused collision, another negligently driven car piles into the wreck, and somewhere in the process plaintiff is injured. See, e. g., Restatement (Second) of Torts § 433B, Illustratation 11; Cummings v. Kendall, 41 Cal. App. 2d 549, 107 P.2d 282 (1940); Murphy v. Taxicabs of Louisville, Inc., 330 S.W.2d 395 (Ky.1959); cf. Micelli v. Hirsch, 83 N.E.2d 240 (Ohio App. 1948) (plaintiff killed; presumption of continuing life); Eramdjian v. Interstate Bakery Corp., 153 Cal. App. 2d 590, 315 P.2d 19 (1957).
The doctrine may fairly be applied to other fact situations. Compare the use of the res ipsa loquitur doctrine in Ybarra v. Spangard, 25 Cal. 2d 486, 154 P.2d 687 (1944) (injury caused to unconscious plaintiff in operating room where several physicians and nurses were present).
See generally, Annot., 100 A.L.R. 2d 16, § 9 (1965); Apodaca v. Haworth, 206 Cal. App. 2d 209, 23 Cal. Rptr. 461 (1962).
The pre-Dean cases stated the rule that last clear chance negligence overrides the defense of contributory negligence without any qualification in terms of a requirement of defendant's negligence preceding the emergence of the peril,2 as appears, for example, from Judge Miller's opinion in Jackson v. Capital Transit Co., 69 App.D.C. 147, 149, 99 F.2d 380, 382 (1938),3 cert. denied, 306 U.S. 630,, 59 S. Ct. 464, 83 L. Ed. 1032 (1939).
Capital Transit Co. v. Grimes, 82 U.S. App.D.C. 393, 164 F.2d 718 (1947), cert. denied 333 U.S. 845, 68 S. Ct. 664, 92 L. Ed. 1129 (1948); Landfair v. Capital Transit Co., 83 U.S.App.D.C. 60, 165 F.2d 255 (1948); Gay v. Augur, 97 U.S. App.D.C. 336, 231 F.2d 495 (1956); Matthews v. Lindsay, 108 U.S.App.D.C. 292, 281 F.2d 927 (1960); Law v. Virginia Stage Lines, Inc., 144 U.S.App. D.C. 115, 444 F.2d 990 (May 13, 1971)
DocketNumber： 23932
Citation Numbers： 449 F.2d 956
Peigh v. Baltimore & O. R. Co , 204 F.2d 391 ( 1953 )
American Sugar Refining Co. v. Ned , 209 F.2d 636 ( 1954 )
Rexford G. Casey v. Corson and Gruman Company, a Corporation , 221 F.2d 51 ( 1955 )
Helen v. F. Gay v. George M. Augur , 231 F.2d 495 ( 1956 )
Bernard Conlon and Mary Conlon v. Cicero Tennant , 289 F.2d 881 ( 1961 )
Hortentia R. Acosta v. The United States , 320 F.2d 382 ( 1963 )
S. & L. Company of Des Moines, a Corporation v. Harry J. ... , 323 F.2d 322 ( 1963 )
Esther Kosberg, Administratrix, Estate of Roberta Ann Clark ... , 394 F.2d 947 ( 1968 )
William J. Hewitt v. Safeway Stores, Inc. , 404 F.2d 1247 ( 1968 )
alice-emery-individually-and-as-trustee-for-the-north-dakota-workmens , 407 F.2d 109 ( 1969 )
H.R.H. Construction Corp. v. Denis Conroy , 411 F.2d 722 ( 1969 )
Reginald Law v. Virginia Stage Lines, Inc., a Corporation , 444 F.2d 990 ( 1971 )
Eramdjian v. Interstate Bakery Corp. , 153 Cal. App. 2d 590 ( 1957 )
Summers v. Tice , 33 Cal. 2d 80 ( 1948 )
Cummings v. Kendall , 41 Cal. App. 2d 549 ( 1940 )
Mike Madrid, Administrator of the Estate of Ted McDonald ... , 486 F.2d 856 ( 1973 )
George N. Drapaniotis v. Daniel Malone Franklin , 504 F.2d 236 ( 1974 )
nellie-m-perkinson-ralph-hawks-v-gilbertrobinson-inc-dba , 821 F.2d 686 ( 1987 )
Michael Belton v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit ... , 20 F.3d 1197 ( 1994 )
Corlett v. Smith , 107 N.M. 707 ( 1988 )
Roderick v. Lake , 108 N.M. 696 ( 1989 )
Bly v. Tri-Continental Industries, Inc. , 663 A.2d 1232 ( 1995 )
Twyman v. Johnson , 655 A.2d 850 ( 1995 )