119 F. 706 (D.S.C. 1902), Coker v. Monaghan Mills

Citation:119 F. 706
Party Name:COKER v. MONAGHAN MILLS et al.
Case Date:December 27, 1902
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Page 706

119 F. 706 (D.S.C. 1902)




United States Circuit Court, D. South Carolina.

December 27, 1902

Staley & Bowman, Hoke Smith, and H. C. Peeples, for complainants.

H. A. Toulmin amend Edmund Wetmore, for defendants.

BRAWLEY, District Judge.

The plaintiff brought her action in the court of common pleas for Greenville county against the Monaghan Mills. This complaint was amended by making the Flynt Building & Construction Company, a corporation of the state of Massachusetts, a party defendant also. This last-named corporation filed its petition for removal into this court on the ground that there was a separable controversy. The prayer of this petition was granted, and an order passed for the removal. When the case came here the defendant the Flynt Building & Construction Company filed a demurrer to the complaint as not setting out a cause of action against it. Before this demurrer came up for a hearing, the plaintiff asked leave to amend her complaint, as hereinafter stated. To reach a conclusion on this motion, a summary of the complaint as it was filed here is necessary.

After stating the corporate character of the defendants, the complaint proceeds: On January 28, 1901, the Monaghan Mills owned a certain brick building, three stories high, which it had constructed for the manufacture of cotton goods, in which it was having c manufacture of cotton goods, in which it was having certain machinery and other appliances placed. The end of this building was not built of brick, but closed with a wooden partition, so that in the future the building could be enlarged. Alongside of this wooden end the Monaghan Mills had constructed a stairway leading from the bottom to the top floor, with doors being swung on the inside of the building, on the right. Persons having occasion to go from the ground to either floor were permitted and accustomed, if they desired, to use this stairway and these doors for this purpose. The door was unlocked and the stairway free. That on the said day of January the intestate of plaintiff was in the employ of the Sacco & Petty Machine Shops, a corporation which had sold to the Monaghan Mills certain machinery, and was under contract to place such machinery in said building as the Monaghan Mills should direct. That at the instance and request of the Monaghan Mills the said Sacco & Petty Machine Shops on that day directed plaintiff's intestate to go to the mill and report for orders. That plaintiff's intestate did go as directed, with tools and overalls and lunch, reported to the defendant the Monaghan Mills, and was instructed by it to place certain machinery on the third floor of said

Page 707

building. That the intestate never had been in the building before, knew nothing of the conditions...

To continue reading