Bell & Coggeshall Co. v. Applegate

• Decision Date: 21 May 1901
• Citation: 62 S.W. 1124
• Parties: BELL & COGGESHALL CO. v. APPLEGATE. [1]
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

62 S.W. 1124

BELL & COGGESHALL CO. v. APPLEGATE. ^[1]

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 21, 1901

Appeal from circuit court, Jefferson county, law and equity division.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by Frank M. Applegate against the Bell & Coggeshall Company to recover damages for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Barker & Woods, for appellants.

Chas G. Hulsewede, H. W. Phillips, and Laurent A. Douglass, for appellee.

BURNAM J.

This appeal is prosecuted from a judgment of the lower court awarding the appellee $2,000 for an injury to his hand received while in the employ of appellants at their sawmill. He alleged that for several days before the injury he had been engaged in sawing lumber into "battens"; that the saw was fastened to a metal shaft about 18 inches long which rested in metal journal boxes, one of the boxes being at the end of the shaft furthest from the saw, and the other about one inch from the saw; that the saw projected through an opening in a table, which was provided with a movable wooden gauge, which graded the size and dimensions of the battens; that the journal boxes were lined with a soft metal used as a lubricant in journals, known as "Babbett metal," and that the shaft turned on this metal; that the journals had on them two metal ridges one-eighth of an inch high and one-fourth of an inch wide, which worked in the same-sized grooves in the journal boxes; that the battens were sawed by pushing a long piece of lumber against the saw along the top of the table and between the saw and gauge that for two days before the happening of the injuries complained of the journal boxes and bearings had become so worn and out of repair that they failed to keep the shaft and journals firm and secure in position, but permitted same to become loose, and to work backwards and forwards in the journal boxes, and caused the saw to turn with a winding motion, thereby rendering the use of such saw unsafe and dangerous, and caused the battens to wind both on the gauge and saw, and to break, and to fly back towards plaintiff; that two days before the accident he informed defendants of the condition of the machine, and requested that it be made safe for use; that defendants directed him to go ahead with the work, and promised that they would fix it as soon as they had time; that on the morning of the accident he again called the attention of the defendants to the condition of the machinery, and informed them that it had not been fixed, was unsafe and dangerous and requested them to repair it and make it safe; that the defendants promised that they would do so; that he relied upon these promises, and continued to work on it until he was injured; that, while the saw was running very fast, a portion of the batten was pinched between the saw and gauge, and the batten was broken, and a portion flew back against his left hand; that the thumb and knuckles were so crushed and wounded that he had lost the use of his left hand,...