The law of motion pictures (1918)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

SEATS AND FLOORS 305 The American rule is extremely unfair to the public. It would be more in keeping with justice if the proprietor were held strictly to account for the giving way of the balcony rail, regardless of whether he knew anything about its construction, or had received notice of any defects. There are some elements of responsibility resting upon the theatre proprietor which, because of the peculiar arrangement of the building and the methods of its use, impose a greater duty upon him than the American jurisdiction exacts. It seems hard to understand why a common carrier, which is bound to accept everyone presenting himself as a passenger, is charged with the highest degree of care, while the proprietor of a theatre, more or less free to fill his house, may expose great numbers of the public to unusual dangers and be liable for ordinary care only. If this rule were modified, it would do more to insure the safety of an audience than is accomplished by all the numerous statutes and ordinances that are passed every year. Weiner v. Scherer 34 comes nearer to expressing this doctrine than any of the other reported American cases. Section 94. — Seats and floors. While the duty of the theatre proprietor has been de use reasonable care in the construction, maintenance and management of it, having regard to the character of the exhibitions given and the customary conduct of spectators who witness them. . . .” 34 Weiner v. Scherer (1909), 64 Misc. (N. Y.) 82; 117 N. Y. Supp. 1008. Here the rail gave way because of the surging of the crowd, causing several people to fall upon the plaintiff who was seated in the orchestra.