Beal v. Carolina Coal Co.

• Decision Date: 20 December 1923
• Docket Number: 99.
• Citation: 120 S.E. 333,186 N.C. 754
• Parties: BEAL v. CAROLINA COAL CO.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

120 S.E. 333

186 N.C. 754

BEAL v. CAROLINA COAL CO.

No. 99.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

December 20, 1923

Appeal from Superior Court, Chatham County; Daniels, Judge.

Action by Joseph H. Beal against the Carolina Coal Company.Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.Affirmed.

Instructions must be considered in their entirety, and error cannot be predicated upon an isolated paragraph.

Instructions must be considered as whole.

This is an action for personal injury received, while in the employ of the defendant, through the explosion of dynamite caps.The defendant offered no evidence.

On April 25, 1923, while plaintiff was performing the duties assigned him by the defendant, an explosion occurred in defendant's mine, which blew off the plaintiff's right arm, and which he alleges burst both of his ear drums and otherwise injured him in the face and body.The dynamite and caps, or exploders, which exploded, were carried down into the mine by defendant's foreman.It was his custom to carry with him into the mine dynamite, caps, and batteries when each shift went on duty.The custom, manner, and method of defendant in handling these for a period of 22 or 23 months, as shown in the evidence, was to put them anywhere he saw fit, together in boxes upon the ground, at different places in the mine.The mine had several sections or rooms.The evidence is that the defendant did not during the period above mentioned keep the dynamite, caps, and batteries stored in any certain section of the mine, but placed them wherever it suited his convenience, regardless of possibility of explosion by coming into contact with the employees.

On the day of the injury to plaintiff, the foreman got out of the car in which the plaintiff went down in the mine, carrying with him the dynamite and batteries, and placed them about 12 feet from the landing, where he got out of the car.The plaintiff while at his post of duty saw some batteries sliding off the shelving where he was, and put out his hand to keep them from falling 2 or 3 feet below, touching the box which contained the batteries, at which time the dynamite exploded.He had not been warned by any one of their presence or the danger attendant upon the duty to which he had been assigned.There was no light in the mine except the small light on miner's cap.The exploders and wire attached to them are very small, and not so easily seen as batteries and dynamite.The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, and defendant appealed.

Siler & Barber, of Pittsboro, and Bynum, Hobgood & Alderman, of Greensboro, for appellant.

W. P Horton, of Pittsboro, for appellee.

CLARK C.J.

The degree of care required of persons having the possession and control of dangerous explosives, such as dynamite, is of the highest kind, requiring constant caution in their care and custody.The degree of care required must be measured by the dangerous character of the article.Brittingham v Stadiem,151 N.C. 302, 66 S.E. 128;Wood v McCabe,151 N.C. 458, 66 S.E. 433;McGhee v. R R.,147 N.C. 142, 60 S.E. 912, 24 L. R. A. (N. S.) 119;Haynes v. Gas Co.,114 N.C. 203, 19 S.E. 344, 26L. R. A. 810, 41 Am. St. Rep. 786;Ross v. Cotton Mills,140...