Loomis v. Toledo Railways & Light Co.

Ohio Supreme Court
Loomis v. Toledo Railways & Light Co., 1 Ohio Law. Abs. 261 (Ohio 1923)
Allen, Day, Jones, Marshall, Matthias, Robinson, Wanamaker

Loomis v. Toledo Railways & Light Co.

Opinion of the Court

JONES, J.

1. A presumption of negligence arises from proof of the falling) of poles and electric wires upon the plaintiff’s automobile in a city street. The maxim, res ipsa loquitor, applies, requiring an explanation of the cause from the defendant. (Cincinnati Traction Co. v. Holzenkamp, 74 Ohio St., 379, approved.)

2. But where the proof raises a probability that such falling poles and! wires were caused by a vis major, the presumption of negligence does not arise. In such case the plaintiff must sustain his specific allegations of negligence by a preponderance of the evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

Robinson, Matthias and Day, JJ., concur. Marshall, C. J., and Allen, J., concur in the judgment. Wanamaker, J., dissents.

Reference

Full Case Name
Allen Loomis v. The Toledo Railways & Light Co.
Cited By
1 case
Status
Published