Burton v. Abbett Tinning & Roofing Co.

• Decision Date: 08 February 1927
• Citation: 120 Or. 536,252 P. 973
• Parties: BURTON v. ABBETT TINNING & ROOFING CO.
• Court: Oregon Supreme Court

252 P. 973

120 Or. 536

BURTON v. ABBETT TINNING & ROOFING CO.

Supreme Court of Oregon

February 8, 1927

Department 1.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County; J. U. Campbell, Judge.

Action by Lillian Burton against the Abbett Tinning & Roofing Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries, which plaintiff claims she sustained by reason of the negligence of defendant.

The material allegations of the compliant are as follows:

"That on the 30th day of June, 1921, plaintiff called at defendant's said place of business upon the business with the said defendant of the repair of a gas stove, and while the plaintiff was in said place of business for said purpose, the defendant was guilty of carelessness and negligence by and through which plaintiff sustained injuries, and hereinafter alleged that said carelessness and negligence of the said defendant consisted of the following:

"That from the entrance to said building back to the office of the said defendant was a perpendicular drop and fall in the floor by which the floor in the front part of the building was about 8 or 10 inches higher than the floor in the back part of said building, and that prior to plaintiff's injury the defendant had constructed a walkway from the high floor to the lower floor and in the passageway from the door to defendant's office. That on the date of plaintiff's injury said walkway had been removed, and defendant maintained no planks, boards walkway, steps, or other like appliances in said passageway from the front of said building to said office, and on the date and at the time of plaintiff's injury, used and occupied said premises in the conduct of said business and said business and said passageway from the entrance of said building back to said office, with said perpendicular drop in said floor, and without any walk, boards, steps, or other like appliances running from the high floor to the lower floor.

"That defendant was further negligent and careless in that defendant's agent or employee, namely, Mrs. W. S. Abbett was at the time of said injuries hereinafter alleged in charge of said office and of said business and building and saw the plaintiff in the front of said store and knew that plaintiff was coming back to said office and in returning had to pass over said perpendicular drop, and gave the plaintiff no notice, warning, or caution respecting the same. That at the time and place of plaintiff's injury said place was dark, and defendant maintained no light or railing at said place where the front floor joined to the back floor and said perpendicular drop existed. That by reason of the aforesaid negligence and carelessness of the defendant, the plaintiff in attempting to pass from the front of said building to the office and without knowledge of said perpendicular drop and without any notice or warning thereof from the defendant, its officers or agents, and while believing that said floor was level, stepped suddenly from said upper floor into said perpendicular drop, and was thrown with great force and violence thereby upon said lower floor and was damaged and injured as hereinafter alleged."

These allegations were put in issue by appropriate pleadings. The trial resulted in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $1,000, from which judgment the defendant appeals to this court.

Paul R Harris, of Portland (Clarence H. Gilbert and Davis & Farrell all of Portland, on the briefs), for appellant.

Henry S. Westbrook, of Portland, for respondent.

McBRIDE, J. (after stating the facts as above).

The evidence of the plaintiff tended to show that the premises of def...