Panela v. Castile Mining Co.

I agree with my Brother McAlvay that there was sufficient testimony relating to the condition of the signaling apparatus and the hoisting machinery to carry the case to the jury. There was some testimony also favorable to plaintiff upon the subject of a latent danger arising from the fact that dynamite was left in the chamber by a crew of men which plaintiff’s crew followed in their work. For these reasons I concur in reversing the judgment and granting a new trial. But that any doctrine of the law of safe place is involved in this case, or that the engineer hired by the defendant was its…