Kreigh v. Westinghouse & Co.
214 U.S. 249 (1909)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Kreigh v. Westinghouse & Co., 214 U.S. 249 (1909)

Kreigh v. Westinghouse Church, Kerr & Company

No. 188

Argued April 27, 28, 1909

Decided May 24, 1909

214 U.S. 249

Syllabus

Where at the time of removal to the federal court, neither of the parties was a resident nor citizen of the district, that defect, although jurisdictional, being only as to the particular district, can be waived, and is waived if, as in this case, the parties make up the issues on the merits without objecting to the jurisdiction. In re Moore,209 U. S. 490; Western Loan Co. v. Butte Co.,210 U. S. 368.

It is the duty of the master to use reasonable diligence in providing a safe place for his employees to work in and to carry on his business, and the employee may, in the absence of notice to the contrary, assume that the master will use reasonable care in furnishing appliances for carrying on the business. Choctaw & Oklahoma R. Co. v. McDade,191 U. S. 64.

The duty of the master to provide safe place and appliances for his employees is a continuing one, and must be exercised whenever circumstances demand it, Santa Fe & Pacific R. Co. v. Holmes,202 U. S. 438, and this applies where the workmen are engaged in work more or less dangerous and it is only a matter of using due skill and care to make the place and appliances safe. Choctaw & Oklahoma R. Co. v. McDade,191 U. S. 64.

Where the negligence of the master in failing to provide and maintain a safe place contributes to the injury of the employee, the master is liable notwithstanding the concurring negligence of those performing the work. Deserant v. Cerillos Coal R. Co.,178 U. S. 409.

Questions of negligence do not become questions of law except where all reasonable men must draw the same conclusion from the evidence, nor should a case be withdrawn from the jury unless the conclusion follows as a matter of law that no recovery can be had upon any view which can be properly taken of the facts which the evidence tends to establish. Gardner v. Michigan Cent. R. Co.,150 U. S. 349.

In this case, held that there was sufficient evidence as to the defective condition of a derrick and the method in which it was operated to

Page 214 U. S. 250

require the submission, under proper instructions from the court, to the jury.

152 F. 120 reversed.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

Page 214 U. S. 252

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.