Brinkley Car Works & Mfg. Co. v. Lewis

Decision Date23 June 1900
Citation57 S.W. 1108
PartiesBRINKLEY CAR WORKS & MFG. CO. v. LEWIS.
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

Appeal from circuit court, Monroe county; James L. Thomas, Judge.

Action by G. R. Lewis against the Brinkley Car Works & Manufacturing Company to recover for a personal injury. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by appellee while in employ of appellant. It is alleged in the complaint that, for about five years prior to the time of injury (November 27, 1897), plaintiff (appellee) had been working around the mill and lumber yard of defendant (appellant), which is a corporation engaged in the manufacture of lumber on an extensive scale; that it was plaintiff's duty to push loaded cars from the mill, on tracks, to various parts of the yard; that defendant had carelessly piled green lumber too near the track on which plaintiff's car was operated, which green lumber on said 27th day of November, 1897, fell on plaintiff and greatly injured him; that defendant had failed to furnish plaintiff a safe place in which to labor, or safe appliances to work with; that plaintiff was damaged by the injury in the sum of $10,000, for which sum he brought suit. Defendant denied the material allegations of the complaint, and alleged that, if plaintiff was injured at the time mentioned, the injury resulted from the negligence of plaintiff and his fellow workmen. On May 3, 1898, the case was tried, and plaintiff recovered judgment for $125. Motion for new trial was filed May 4th. Motion was overruled, and defendant excepted. In due time defendant filed its bill of exceptions, and appealed to this court. The evidence, in full, on the part of the plaintiff, is as follows: Isom Humphrey testified as follows: "I know the plaintiff. I was working at the mill of defendant at the time plaintiff received the injury. I was distributing lumber, and plaintiff was running the push car. My place of working was about seventy-five or one hundred yards from where plaintiff was hurt, but I could see the pile that fell from where I was working. When a car was hard to push, myself and others would be called upon to assist in pushing it out. When the lumber fell I was right in front of plaintiff,—about ten feet from him. The lumber struck me and Lewis [plaintiff], and Lewis laid there until we got the lumber off of him. The pile of lumber was green, and was 1 inch thick, 12 inches wide, and 16 feet long. It was near the track, and the lumber on the car struck it, which caused it to fall. The lumber which fell was piled by Toney James and Tom Thornton, and a part of it was piled the day before it fell. The duty of James and Thornton was to load lumber on the flat cars for shipping, but they would sometimes help plaintiff to push out the car." Tom Hicks: "I have been working for defendant for four or five years. I loaded the lumber from the saw to the car, which was then taken by the plaintiff, Lewis, and others out into the yard. Sometimes Toney James and Tom Thornton would assist in pushing out the car. They piled most of the lumber which fell and caused plaintiff's injury. The plaintiff would often assist in piling the lumber. Do not know whether he assisted in piling the lumber which fell or not. Aquella Polk worked with plaintiff. I piled a part of the lumber which fell, and, if I had piled all of it, I do not think it would have fallen. When there was no lumber to take from the saw to the car, I would be required to do any other work to be done." G. R. Lewis, the plaintiff: "I am the plaintiff in this case. I am 40 years old, and am married. I had been in the employ of defendant, prior to November 27, 1887, about four or five years. On November 27, 1897, while myself and Aquella Polk and some others were pushing a loaded car along the track to the yard, a large pile of green lumber, 16 feet long, fell on me and broke my leg. Dr. Sumpter was called...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Brinkley Car Works & Manufacturing Company v. Lewis
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • June 23, 1900
    ... ... because the place was not safe." Little Rock, M. R. & T. Ry. v. Leverett, 48 Ark. 333, 3 S.W. 50; ... Davis v. Ry. 53 Ark. 117, 13 S.W. 801; ... Fones v. Phillips, 39 Ark. 17; ... Coombs v. New Bedford Cordage Co. 102 Mass ... 572; Sullivan v. India Mfg. Co., 113 Mass ... 396. This doctrine seems to accord with sound reason and ... principle, as well as with the weight of the adjudications on ... this question, and we see no reason to justify a departure ...          It is ... shown by the evidence of the plaintiff (the appellee) ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT