Byrne v. Boadle
Court of Exchequer
2 H. & C. 722 (1863)
Relevant factsFree
As Byrne (plaintiff) walked past flour dealer Boadle's (defendant) building, he was struck and badly injured by a barrel of flour being lowered from an upper window. Byrne sued for negligence, but the trial court found no evidence of Boadle's negligence and entered judgment for Boadle. On appeal, Byrne argued negligence should be presumed from the accident itself, with the burden shifting to Boadle to disprove it; the court of appeals agreed and ruled for Byrne, and Boadle appealed further.
IssueFree
Whether negligence may be presumed from the mere fact that an accident occurred, without the plaintiff first presenting specific evidence of how the defendant was negligent.