Judson v. Giant Powder Co. - 107 Cal. 549, 40 P. 1020 (1895)

Rule:

From the mere fact of an explosion it is competent for the jury to infer, as a proposition of fact, that there was some negligence in the management of the machine, or some defect in its condition.

Facts:

The respondent property owner instituted a negligence action against the petitioner factory for damages to the owner’s property, which resulted from an explosion of nitroglycerine in the factory's building on the shore of San Francisco Bay. The property owner granted the premises to the factory to manufacture dynamite. The factory contended that such explosions were generally contemplated by everyone who handled dynamite, and that it gave the property owner actual notice of the dangerous character of its business through a previous explosion that damaged the property owner's premises, and that by continuing in business afterward, the property owner assumed the risk. The lower court entered judgment in favor of the property owner. The petitioner factory appealed. 

Issue:

Under the circumstances, could the petitioner factory be held liable for negligence? 

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court affirmed the judgment of the lower court, finding that in making the grant, the property owner had a right to assume that due care would be exercised in the conduct of the business. The court found that although the property owner assumed certain risks and dangers that surrounded the manufacture of dynamite, the property owner still waived no action for damages that might arise through the negligence of factory. The court also found the evidence established a prima facie case of negligence.