## Facts

- Elnor Lobert drove a two-door sedan owned by Ralph Pack in the early morning of July 8, 1936.
- Pack rode in the rear seat directly behind the driver.
- During the trip, Pack kicked or pushed against the back of Lobert’s seat; she protested and he stopped.
- After the car traveled about two miles, a sudden, forceful kick or thrust struck the back of Lobert’s seat, causing her to lurch forward, lose control, and crash into a culvert, injuring her.
- There was evidence that Pack was asleep when his leg or body struck the seat.
- Lobert sued Pack for negligence based on the seat-kicking movement.

## Issues

1. Whether a defendant can be liable in negligence for a bodily movement occurring while asleep, without proof the defendant was negligent in falling asleep or failing to stay awake.
2. Whether the trial court correctly instructed the jury to find for the defendant if it believed he was asleep when the movement causing the crash occurred.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the judgment for Pack.
- The court held that negligence liability requires a conscious, voluntary act of the defendant.
- A bodily movement occurring during sleep is not a conscious, voluntary act and cannot itself constitute actionable negligence.
- Absent evidence that Pack was negligent in going to sleep or in failing to remain awake, he could not be held liable for injuries caused by involuntary movements while asleep.
- The trial court properly instructed the jury that if Pack was asleep at the time of the movement, the verdict should be for the defendant.

## Legal Principles

- Negligence presupposes fault and requires a voluntary act or a voluntary failure to act when there is a duty.
- To impose liability for an allegedly negligent act, the plaintiff must show the act was the defendant’s conscious, volitional conduct.
- Involuntary bodily movements during sleep are not negligent acts.
- A sleeping defendant may be liable only if the plaintiff proves independent negligence in falling asleep or failing to take reasonable precautions to stay awake under the circumstances.

## Conclusion

Because the plaintiff’s theory depended on a bodily movement that the jury could find occurred while the defendant was asleep, and there was no proof that the defendant was negligent in going to sleep or remaining asleep, the defendant was not liable and the defense verdict was affirmed.


Lobert v. Pack, 337 Pa. 103, 9 A.2d 365 (Pa. 1939)