D owned a railroad with a turntable near P's property. D was required to keep the turntable locked, but they sometimes failed to do so.
P and some other children would sometimes play on the tracks and on the turntable.
One day, P's ankle was severed when the turntable was unlocked.
P sued D for negligence for not locking the turntable.
Procedural History:
Trial court found for P.
NE Supreme Court reversed, remanded.
Issues:
Does an individual have the responsibility when dealing with dangerous instruments to take reasonable precautions such that the risk of injury posed by the instrument does not outweigh its utility?
Holding/Rule:
An individual has the responsibility when dealing with dangerous instruments to take reasonable precautions such that the risk of injury posed by the instrument does not outweigh its utility.
Reasoning:
The use of dangerous machinery is good for our society. Such machinery cannot be rendered completely safe.
When weighed against their utility, the risk of harm is insignificant. When the danger begins to outweigh the social benefit, then use of the machinery should be restricted.
The dangers associated with the turntable could have been restricted through the use of a lock.
The lock would not interfere with the operation of the turntable, so it should have been used.
The court should consider…
The character and location of the premises
The purpose for which they are used
The probability of injury
The precautions necessary to reduce the risk of injury
The relations between the precautions and their effects on the beneficial use of the premises.
