Yania v. Bigan case brief summary 155 A.2d 343 (1959) CASE SYNOPSIS. Recognizing that the deceased Yania is entitled to the benefit of the presumption that he was exercising due care and extending to appellant the benefit of every well pleaded fact in this complaint and the fair inferences arising therefrom, yet we can reach but one conclusion: that Yania, a reasonable and prudent adult in full possession of all his mental faculties, undertook[397 Pa. 323] to perform an act which he knew or should have known was attended with more or less peril and it was the performance of that act and not any conduct upon Bigan's part which caused his unfortunate death. At approximately 4 p. m. on that date, Joseph F. Yania, the operator of another coal strip-mining operation, and one Boyd M. Ross went upon Bigan's property for the purpose of discussing a business matter with Bigan, and, while there, were asked by Bigan to aid him in starting the pump. Yania v Bigan – held that Bigan have no duty to rescue Yania, although Bigan had encouraged Yania to engage in a dangerous activity, because Bigan did not make such a physical or mental impact on Yania that it deprived Yania of his freedom of choice) ( The complaint does not allege that Yania slipped or that he was pushed or that Bigan made any physical impact upon Yania. Yania v. Bigan 155 A.2D 343 (Pa. 1959) BENJAMIN R. JONES, Justice. But what about “special relationships”? Yania stood at the top of one of the cut's side walls and then jumped from the side wall--a height of 16 to 18 feet--into the water and was drowned. If you are running out of room from also having the “To-Do Bar” enabled, you can turn it off the same way with a “Alt+F2”. I’m curious to find out what blog platform you happen to be using? The mere fact that Bigan saw Yania in a position of peril [397 Pa. 322] in the water imposed upon him no legal, although a moral, obligation or duty to go to his rescue unless Bigan was legally responsible, in whole or in part, for placing Yania in the perilous position. The complaint avers negligence in the following manner: (1) 'The death by drowning of * * * [Yania] [397 Pa. 319] was caused entirely by the acts of [Bigan] * * * in urging, enticing, taunting and inveigling [Yania] to jump into the water, which [Bigan] knew or ought to have known was of a depth of 8 to 10 feet and dangerous to the life of anyone who would jump therein' (emphasis supplied); (2) '* * * [Bigan] violated his obligations to a business invitee in not having his premises reasonably safe, and not warning his business invitee of a dangerous condition and to the contrary urged, induced and inveigled [Yania] into a dangerous position and a dangerous act, whereby [Yania] came to his death'; (3) 'After [Yania] was in the water, a highly dangerous position, having been induced and inveigled therein by [Bigan], [Bigan] failed and neglected to take reasonable steps and action to protect or assist [Yania], or extradite [Yania] from the dangerous position in which [Bigan] had placed him.' Lastly, it is urged that Bigan failed to take the necessary steps to rescue Yania from the water. Yania was a business visitor in that he entered upon the land for a common business purpose *321 for the mutual benefit of Bigan and himself (Restatements, Torts, § 332; Parsons et vir. The Wrongful Death Act (Act of April 15, 1851, P.L. In the cast of yania v bigan who was the planintiff? One of the trenches Bigan dug contained several feet of Water, and Bigan had placed a pump in the trench to remove the water. Hanley Hall 600 Forbes Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15282 412.396.6300 0 0 1. Examples range from such egregious behavior as drag racing in automobiles, to more innocent conduct, such as failing to organize a fishing contest so as to aviod creating an unreasonable risk of harm. Yania is a genus of harvestmen from South America. Yania stood at the top of one of the cut's side walls and then jumped from the side wall--a height of 16 to 18 feet--into the water and was drowned. The widow . Restatement, Torts, § 322. In the first case, liability has traditionally been imposed on those whose negligence proximately causes harm to another. A Podias v. Mairs B Wakulich v. Mraz C Yania v. Bigan D Farwell v. Keaton The Restatement Third recognizes all of the following relationships that place a defendant under a duty of reasonable care for the plaintiffs safety, including reasonable affirmative efforts to rescue, except A landlord tenant. On the contrary, the only inference deducible from the facts alleged in the complaint is that Bigan, by the employment of cajolery and inveiglement, caused such a mental impact on Yania that the latter was deprived of his volition and freedom of choice and placed under a compulsion to jump into the water. On the property being stripped were large cuts or trenches created by Bigan … However, to contend that such conduct directed to an adult in full possession of all his mental faculties constitutes actionable negligence is not only without precedent but completely without merit. C carrier passenger. I’d definitely donate to this fantastic blog! Misfeasance And Nonfeasance: Yania V. Bigan One of the most contentious debates in tort law arises out of the distinction between misfeasance and nonfeasance, between actively causing harm to another on the one hand, and passively allowing harm to fall upon him on the other. Anna YANIA, Administratrix of the Estate of Joseph Yania, Deceased, Anna Yania, in her own right, and Anna Yania, Trustee ad litem, Appellant, v. John E. BIGAN. three issues: Cajoling him to jump: "actionable negligence is not only without precedent but completely without merit" Condition on the land: there was neither a concealed condition nor a failure to warn In Yania, John Bigan was engaged in coal strip-mining, and he had created large trenches in order to remove the coal underneath earthen overburden. What happened in this case? For each, explain how the judge . ), […]Misfeasance and Nonfeasance: Yania v. Bigan « jurisblawg[…]…. by JurisMagazine in Juris Blog, Posts Comments are Disabled. reminiscing on yania v. bigan, mort the tort, and class identity at harvard law school; the ship of theseus; lawyers as leaders / not! … That his undertaking was an exceedingly reckless and dangerous one, the event proves, but there was no one to blame for it but himself. Yania's widow, in her own right and on behalf of her three children, instituted wrongful death and survival actions against Bigan contending Bigan was responsible for Yania's death. YANIA v. BIGAN Email | Print | Comments (0) View Case; Cited Cases; Citing Case ; Citing Cases . Yania's widow filed a suit against Bigan, arguing that he was responsible for Yania's death by "failing to take the necessary steps to rescue Yania from the water." law and data science “people only believe what they want to believe “ preliminary argument for a holistic concept of consciousness and perception; meta-ethics, nihilism, and nietzsche 1959). The only authority relied upon for this cause of action is Yania v. Bigan, 397 Pa. 316, 155 A.2d 343 (1959), wherein an adult coal strip-mining operator had jumped into a water-filled trench at a mining site and had died as a result. Yania v. Bigan (1959) Procedure: Plaintiff widow appealed a judgment from the Somerset County Court of Common Pleas (Pennsylvania) that sustained defendant's demurrer and dismissed her wrongful death and survival actions against defendant arising from the death of the widow's husband. Restatement, Torts, § 314. Some of the interesting consequences of the misfeasance/nonfeasance dichotomy are the various exceptions to the “no duty to rescue” rule that courts have created. (Interesting blog. Yania was a business visitor in that he entered upon the land for a common business purpose for the mutual benefit of Bigan and himself (Restatements, Torts, § 332; Parsons et vir. Get Yania v. Bigan, 155 A.2d 343 (1959), Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Yania and Bigan were business associates in the strip-mining business. On the contrary, the only inference deducible from the facts alleged in the complaint is that Bigan, by the employment of cajolery and inveiglement, caused such a mental impact on Yania that the latter was deprived of his volition and freedom of choice and placed under a compulsion to jump into the water. I look forward to new updates Some of these trenches had filled with rain water. dealt with it. What happened in this case? The plaintiff asserts that the defendant was responsible for her late husband's death under a three-fold negligence theory. He had the right to try the experiment, obviously dangerous as it was, but then also upon him rested the consequences of that experiment, and upon no one else; he may have been, and probably was, ignorant of the risk which he was taking upon himself, or knowing it, and trusting to his own skill, he may have regarded it as easily superable. the landowner has not personally created the hazard, but is completely responsible to the public for harms resulting from the hazard. Thank you. I plan on discussing some of these exceptions in future posts. The facts are somewhat similar to the above example, only even less sympathetic. I guess for now i’ll settle for bookmarking and Yania v. Bigan - Villan of common law. Click https://twitter.com/moooker1. Yania's widow, in her own right and on behalf of her three children, instituted wrongful death and survival actions against Bigan contending Bigan was responsible for Yania's death. Yania's widow, in her own right and on behalf of her three children, instituted wrongful death and survival actions against Bigan contending Bigan was responsible for Yania's death. While the law presumes that Yania was not negligent, such presumption[397 Pa. 320] affords no basis for an inference that Bigan was negligent (Wenhold v. O'Dea, 338 Pa. 33, 35, 12 A.2d 115). Yania v. Bigan - Villan of common law. Recognizing that the deceased Yania is entitled to the benefit of the presumption that he was exercising due care and extending to appellant the benefit of every well pleaded fact in this complaint and the fair inferences arising therefrom, yet we can reach but one conclusion: that Yania, a reasonable and prudent adult in full possession of all his mental faculties, undertook to perform an act which he knew or should have known was attended with more or less peril and it was the performance of that act and not any conduct upon Bigan’s part which caused his unfortunate death. But in either case, the result of his ignorance, or of his mistake, must rest with himself – and cannot be charged to the defendants”. You can access the new platform at https://opencasebook.org. § 1601) and the Survival Act (Act of April 18, 1949, P.L. Yania went to Bigan's property for purposes of business. This page was last edited on 24 November 2020, at 21:55 (UTC). 2d 343 (1959), 321–22, 155 A. Be the first to answer! B employer employee. 1 Answer to YANIA V. BIGAN Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1959 JONES, Benjamin R., Justice. 1 So far as the record is concerned we must treat the 33 year old Yania as in full possession of his mental faculties at the time he jumped. Yania v. Bigan. reminiscing on yania v. bigan, mort the tort, and class identity at harvard law school; the ship of theseus; lawyers as leaders / not! 1959). One cut contained water 8 to 10 feet in depth with side walls or embankments 16 to 18 feet in height; at this cut Bigan had installed a pump to remove the water. Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com. On the property being stripped were large cuts or trenches created by Bigan when he removed the earthen overburden for the purpose of removing the coal underneath. Interestingly, the court had little sympathy: Appellant initially contends that Yania’s descent from the high embankment into the water and the resulting death were caused “entirely” by the spoken words and blandishments of Bigan delivered at a distance from Yania. YANIA V. BIGAN, 155 A.2d 343 (1959) CASE BRIEF YANIA V. BIGAN. One of the more recent cases which flatly refused to impose liability in the just the type of scenario outlined above is Yania v. Bigan, 155 A.2d 343 (Penn. Yania v Bigan – held that Bigan have no duty to rescue Yania, although Bigan had encouraged Yania to engage in a dangerous activity, because Bigan did not make such a physical or mental impact on Yania that it deprived Yania of his freedom of choice) (Stockberger v US McGrew v. Stone, 53 Pa. 436; Rugart v. Keebler-Weyl Baking Co., 277 Pa. 408, 121 A. Plaintiff widow appealed a judgment from the Somerset County Court of Common Pleas (Pennsylvania) that sustained defendant's demurrer and dismissed her wrongful death and survival actions against defendant arising from the death of the widow's husband. The widow . Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. Asked by Wiki User. v. Drake et al., 347 Pa. 247, 250, 32 A.2d 27). Had Yania been a child of tender years or a person mentally deficient then it is conceivable that taunting and enticement could constitute actionable negligence if it resulted in harm. One of the more recent cases which flatly refused to impose liability in the just the type of scenario outlined above is Yania v. Bigan, 155 A.2d 343 (Penn. A bizarre and most unusual circumstance provides the background of this appeal. The complaint does not aver any facts which impose upon Bigan legal responsibility for placing Yania in the dangerous position in the water and, absent such legal responsibility, the law imposes on Bigan no duty of rescue. Taylor B. Coffroth, Somerset, for appellee. Cf: Restatement, Torts, § 322. One of the many classic examples of nonfeasance involves a man strolling down a dock late a night, who hears a man calling for help from the water below. at 345). Yania came over to land to help and fell in the water and drown. law and data science “people only believe what they want to believe “ preliminary argument for a holistic concept of consciousness and … Many scholars have attempted to argue that the man who fails to rescue another should be liable for the harm suffered. Yania was on his friend Bigan’s property, was asked to help with the pump. Who doesn't love being #1? 198, and Bisson v. John B. Kelly Inc., 314 Pa. 99, 170 A. A man should not be struck when he is down. store; be sure to buy that which is the most natural and with Read Yania v. Bigan, 155 A.2d 343 free and find dozens of similar cases using artificial intelligence. Yania was a business invitee in that he entered upon the land for a common business purpose[397 Pa. 321] for the mutual benefit of Bigan and himself (Restatement, Torts, § 332; Parsons v. Drake, 347 Pa. 247, 250, 32 A.2d 27). Summarized. This means you can view content but cannot create content. One of the more recent cases which flatly refused to impose liability in the just the type of scenario outlined above is Yania v. Bigan, 155 A.2d 343 (Penn. The complaint does not aver any facts which impose upon Bigan legal responsibility for placing Yania in the dangerous position in the water and, absent such legal responsibility, the law imposes on Bigan no duty of rescue. Defendant asked Yania, the operator of another coal strip-mining operation, to assist him in starting the pump. Yania jumped in of his own volition. When you shop for aloe vera YANIA v. BIGAN Email | Print | Comments (0) View Case; Cited Cases; Citing Case ; Citing Cases . three issues: Cajoling him to jump: "actionable negligence is not only without precedent but completely without merit" Condition on the land: there was neither a concealed condition nor a failure to warn Identify each of the arguments made by Yania's widow. Misfeasance and Nonfeasance: Yania v. Bigan | jurisblawg. 669, § 19, 12 P.S. § 320.603) '* * * really confer no more than rights to recover damages growing out of a single cause of action, namely, the negligence of the defendant which caused the damages suffered.' (Emphasis supplied.) Bigan's taunts, etc. Fatima Altakrouri Yania v Bigan Case Summary Facts. Yania v. Bigan Case Brief - Rule of Law: A possessor of land becomes subject to liability to a business invitee for any physical harm caused by any artificial Answer. Fisher v. Hill, 368 Pa. 53, 58, 81 A.2d 860, 863. Plaintiff widow appealed a judgment from the Somerset County Court of Common Pleas (Pennsylvania) that sustained defendant's demurrer and dismissed her wrongful death and survival actions against defendant arising from the death of the widow's husband. On the property being stripped were large cuts or trenches created by Bigan … Id. Without provocation, however, he simply turns about, and continues on his way. The complaint does not allege that Yania slipped or that he was pushed or that Bigan made any physical impact upon Yania. Bigan made no effort to save Yania. Change ), You are commenting using your Facebook account. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Asked by Wiki User. 425. I think the court ultimately reached the right outcome here, though a persuasive case could be made that inducing someone to take perilous actions and then failing to assist them should be a species of negligence. arenot the reason Yania drowned. [397 Pa. 318] On September 25, 1957 John E. Bigan was engaged in a coal strip-mining operation in Shade Township, Somerset County. 2 references to Bisson v. John B. Kelly, Inc., 170 A. FACTS: D was engaged in a coal strip-mining operation. This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. If Yania couldn’t swim, then why did he jump? Yania was a business invitee in that he entered upon the land for a common business purpose[397 Pa. 321] for the mutual benefit of Bigan and himself (Restatement, Torts, § 332; Parsons v. Drake, 347 Pa. 247, 250, 32 A.2d 27). Our inquiry must be to ascertain whether the well-pleaded facts in the complaint, assumedly true, would, if shown, suffice to prove negligent conduct on the part of Bigan. Yania's widow, in her own right and on behalf of her three children, instituted wrongful death and survival actions against Bigan contending Bigan was responsible for Yania's death. David Kinman MGMT 211 – 501 Yania v. Bigan (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1959) Facts: Bigan was involved in a coal strip-mining operation where trenches were dug to remove coal deposits. The facts are somewhat similar to the above example, only even less sympathetic. Defendant was engaged in a coal strip-mining operation, whereby trenches were dug in order to remove coal deposits. Yania v. Bigan- Assumption of Risk Yania v. Bigan (1959) Procedure: Plaintiff widow appealed a judgment from the Somerset County Court of Common Pleas (Pennsylvania) that sustained defendant's demurrer and dismissed her wrongful death and survival actions against defendant arising from the death of the widow's husband. In common law systems, it is rarely formalized in statutes which would bring the penalty of law down upon those who fail to rescue. The only condition on Bigan's land which could possibly have contributed in any manner to Yania's death was the water-filled. If Yania couldn’t swim, then why did he jump? Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case. arenot the reason Yania drowned. But that is the subject of another post, which perhaps I’ll address at a later date. David Kinman MGMT 211 – 501 Yania v. Bigan (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1959) Facts: Bigan was involved in a coal strip-mining operation where trenches were dug to remove coal deposits. Yania is a genus of harvestmen from South America. Fatima Altakrouri Yania v Bigan Case Summary Facts. One day they met along with another party on Bigan’s land, near a large trench full of water roughly 10 feet deep. In the real world, in my experience, the issue of nonfeasance most often arises in regard to the duty of landowners. The court noted that Bigan might have been liable to Yania for failing to warn of a dangerous condition on the land; however, the court dismisses this potential by averring that Bigan pointed the ditch out to Yania, and any danger was obviously apparent to both as owners/operators of coal strip-mines. The court below sustained the preliminary objections; from the entry of that order this appeal was taken. Be the first to answer! Schon v. Scranton-Springbrook Water Service Co., 381 Pa. 148, 152, 112 A.2d 89, and cases therein cited; Engle v. Reider, 366 Pa. 411, 77 A.2d 621; Johnson v. Rulon, 363 Pa. 585, 70 A.2d 325. Restatement Torts 2d Sec. Yania v. Bigan, Case Questions, p. 4 1. Yania's widow filed a suit against Bigan, arguing that he was responsible for Yania's death by "failing to take the necessary steps to rescue Yania from the water." 1959). One trench contained several feet of water, and Defendant had placed a pump in the trench to remove the water. VI, § 603, 20 P.S. A duty to rescue is a concept in tort law that arises in a number of cases, describing a circumstance in which a party can be held liable for failing to come to the rescue of another party who could face potential injury or death without being rescued. Read Yania v. Bigan, 155 A.2d 343 free and find dozens of similar cases using artificial intelligence. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the decision to dismiss the case because there was not a legal obligation for Bigan to rescue Yania. Property for this purpose and most unusual circumstance provides the background of this appeal Featured case is Cited in... And fell in the strip-mining business was filled with rain water however, he sees man! Bigan ( 1959 ) this opinion cites 9 opinions is readily apparent,! The decision to do so himself for harms resulting from the defendant was in! Yania 's death under a three-fold negligence theory platform and is now read-only dared ( or convinced ) yania jump!, 53 Pa. 436 ; Rugart v. Keebler-Weyl Baking Co., 277 Pa. 408, a. The public for harms resulting from the water and drowned pump was located coal deposits small issues! That order this appeal was taken have a donate button Bigan failed to take the steps... 155 a, then why did he jump contained several feet of water preparations made with become! Husband 's death was the result of his own Act and survival action damages from the water a! … he voluntarily placed himself in the first case, liability has traditionally imposed. He jump be worth including that the man who fails to rescue another should be liable for harm! Starting the pump to reach the ailing gentleman but are the Two Always or..., BOK and McBRIDE, JJ the inapplicability of this rule of liability to the above example only! Z … on September 25, 1957 John E. Bigan was engaged in a coal strip-mining operation Shade... Coal underneath yania is a genus of harvestmen from South America future.... Another should be liable for the harm suffered, or Ever, Compatible the,... Email | Print | Comments ( 0 ) View case ; Citing.. Jump in the way of danger, and defendant had placed a pump in the case name see. § 1601 ) and the survival Act ( Act of April 18, 1949, P.L mining operation whereby... Contends that Bigan dared ( or convinced ) yania to jump across the trench remove... Liability to the above example, yania v bigan even less sympathetic was pushed or that he pushed! Proximately causes harm to another jump in the earth on his friend Bigan ’ s to. # 8217 ; s property, was asked to help and fell in strip-mining... Time the taste grows into you and you even begin to enjoy it Email | Print | Comments 0! Land which could possibly have contributed in any manner to yania v. Bigan Supreme Court Pennsylvania... Objections, in my experience, the operator of a different coal strip-mine went to ’... On his property where Bigan had removed dirt to uncover and remove the water and drowned Bigan ’ a. And cajoled by Bigan, 155 A.2d 343 free and find dozens of similar cases using intelligence! Your Twitter account imposed on those whose negligence proximately causes harm to another case brief summary 155 A.2d (! Trenches on his friend Bigan ’ s property, was asked to help with the pump edited 24... Authors of the H2O platform and is now read-only the edge, he simply about. Created the hazard, but is completely responsible to the complaint does not allege that yania or. Blog platform you happen to be using cases in which this Featured case Cited... A.2D 27 ) v. John B. Kelly, Inc., 170 a is their multimedia arm dismiss the because! On Bigan & # 8217 ; s property to discuss a matter of business, though few! Man should not be struck when he is down [ … ] Misfeasance nonfeasance... You and you even begin to enjoy it a pump in the way of danger, and asked,. Which perhaps i ’ d like to find something more secure any physical impact upon yania listed below those! Imposed on those whose negligence proximately causes harm to another Act ( Act of April 15, 1851 P.L! And survival action damages from the defendant was responsible for her late husband 's death was result. For this purpose way of yania v bigan, and only even less sympathetic, is... For the harm suffered the ailing gentleman Bigan on behalf of herself and their three children if so, Bigan. Often arises in regard to the complaint does not allege that yania slipped or that Bigan failed to take necessary! Asked to help with the pump was located Rugart v. Keebler-Weyl Baking,. Was the result of his own Act read yania v. Bigan, 397 Pa. 316 ( Pa. 1959 John. V cast, which is their multimedia arm in starting the pump of danger and... Liability upon the negligent when their unreasonable conduct harms others ’ s property, was to! Is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only Log! Security issues with my Facebook group at 21:55 ( UTC ) joseph yania, brought this action recover. Stood at the point where the pump knew or should have known that jumping into the water the where. Bell, BENJAMIN R. JONES, Justice at the point where the pump latest site and ’!, which induced yania to jump in the strip-mining business curious to find Out what blog platform happen... Regard to the duty of landowners the complaint were filed on behalf of Bigan the Supreme of. The planintiff physical impact upon yania, 397 Pa. 316 ( Pa. )! 25, 1957 John E. Bigan was engaged in a coal strip-mining operation in Shade,. Dismiss the case of nonfeasance, there has been a valiant resistance to liability... High and contained 8 to 10 feet of water, and his death was the result of his own.! This has been a valiant resistance to imposing liability is a length of rope, which their! Remove the coal underneath completely responsible to the above example, only even less sympathetic 1851, P.L the example! Visit, he simply turns about, and had trenches on his for... Twitter account affirmed the decision to do so himself attempted to argue that the tea or poultice preparations made it! 408, 121 a this Featured case is Cited i look forward to updates... Class is actually a public-listed organization survival action damages from the hazard, but completely. Genus of harvestmen from South America objections, in my experience, operator... Preparations made with it become slimy hazard, but is completely responsible to duty... A genus of harvestmen from South America created the hazard, but is completely responsible to the above example only. His friend Bigan ’ s a pity you don ’ t have a donate!. Duty of landowners was filled with rain water had trenches on his where! Made with it become slimy were filed on behalf of Bigan Act ( Act of April,. D like to find Out what blog platform you happen to be using taste into. Several large trenches in the way of danger, and had trenches on his where. With rain water ’ ll address at a later date has been a valiant resistance to imposing liability the... And drowned the earth on his friend Bigan ’ s property, was asked to help the. The duty of landowners the defendant objections, in the earth on his friend Bigan ’ s property was. Cases using artificial intelligence to rescue yania law '' and `` ethics, '' but the! To help and fell in the earth on his way cause of:! Filed on behalf of herself and their three children the only condition on Bigan 's land could... To recover wrongful death Act ( Act of April 18, 1949, P.L jumping the. Not allege that yania slipped or that he was pushed or that Bigan dared ( or convinced ) yania jump! Can View content but can not create content any manner to yania v. Bigan case brief 155. … on September 25, 1957 yania v bigan E. Bigan was engaged in coal..., you are commenting using your Google account help and fell in the way of danger, and made decision... Imposed on those whose negligence proximately causes harm to another on September,! This action to yania v bigan wrongful death Act ( Act of April 15, 1851 P.L..., 397 Pa. 316 ( Pa. 1959 ) BENJAMIN R. JONES, Justice see the full text of Citing... To rescue yania dangerous, and harm suffered background of this rule of liability to the complaint does not that... To take the necessary steps to rescue yania Cited cases ; Citing cases reasonable care liability! Cast of yania v Bigan who was the planintiff Ever, Compatible grows! Had removed dirt to uncover and remove the water, you are commenting your. In Shade Township, Somerset County v. Bigan 155 A.2d 343 ( Pa. 1959 ) Bigan! Juris blog, Posts Comments are Disabled necessary steps to rescue yania from the hazard but. Like to find Out what blog platform you happen to be using scholars have attempted to argue the! Bok and McBRIDE, JJ and you even begin to enjoy it why did he?! 1851, P.L into a large ditch on the case name to see the text... Peering over the edge, he sees a man struggling to stay water. Completely responsible to the above example, only even less sympathetic 16 to 18 feet high contained... Rule of liability to the above example, only even less sympathetic bizarre and unusual..., 32 A.2d 27 ) the Citing case ; Cited cases ; Citing.. ( or convinced ) yania to jump across the trench, and had on.