Colwell v. Parker
Decision Date | 11 December 1909 |
Docket Number | 16,153 |
Citation | 81 Kan. 295,105 P. 524 |
Parties | ALLY COLWELL, Appellant, v. C. W. PARKER, Appellee |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Decided July, 1909.
Appeal from Dickinson district court; OSCAR L. MOORE, judge.
STATEMENT.
C. W PARKER is a manufacturer of tents, platforms, show fronts and other paraphernalia used in street fairs and carnivals. His place of business is at Abilene. He manufactured and leased to Raver & Darnaby a moving picture show for exhibition in a tent, entrance to which was by ascending steps to a platform, thence through a passage, and by descending steps about four feet to the ground inside the tent. Raver & Darnaby were holding a carnival at Oskaloosa, Iowa. The appellant entered the tent from the platform, and, in stepping to one side, fell to the ground and received injuries. To recover damages she brought this action against the lessees and the appellee, Parker. The petition alleged that at the time she entered the tent the exhibition was in progress; that the lights were turned off, and that by reason of the darkness she was unable to discover the steps and supposed the platform was on a level with the tent. The only negligence alleged against the appellee is that he failed to provide railings, or guards, at the sides of the platform or steps to prevent persons from stepping off.
The court instructed the jury that if the platform and steps were constructed in a manner similar to, and with the same protection as, other platforms and steps used for the same purpose throughout the country, and if they found that such platform and steps had been used by a great number of people and no accident other than the one in controversy had occurred, they should take these matters into consideration in determining whether an ordinarily prudent manufacturer would have had any reason to anticipate the accident; and, if they believed that an ordinarily prudent person would have no reason to anticipate such an accident, that the appellee could not be held negligent under the facts. They were also instructed that if they found from the evidence that the platform and steps were constructed in the usual and ordinary manner, and in a way usually regarded by manufacturers of such platforms and steps as reasonably safe for the use of the public, such would be the exercise of ordinary care on the part of the appellee.
The jury returned a verdict in favor of the appellant, awarding her $ 1500 damages. They made certain special findings of fact, among which are the following:
The court sustained the motion on the part of the appellee for judgment on the findings notwithstanding the general verdict and of this ruling the appellant complains.
Judgment affirmed.
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
1. NEGLIGENCE -- Proximate Cause -- Special Findings and Verdict...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wright v. K.C. Structural Steel Co.
...injury. Allison v. Stivers, 81 Kan. 713, 106 Pac. 996; St. Louis & S.F.R.R. Co. v. Justice, 80 Kan. 10, 101 Pac. 469; Colwell v. Parker, 81 Kan. 295, 105 Pac. 524; Campbell v. Weathers, 153 Kan. 316, 328; Smith v. Mead Const. Co., 129 Kan. 229, 233, 282 Pac. 708; Woodard v. Bush, 282 Mo. 16......
-
Wright v. Kansas City Structural Steel Co.
...65 Kan. 436, 70 P. 358; A. T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Penfold, 57 Kan. 148, 45 P. 574; Bailey v. Kelly, 93 Kan. 723, 145 P. 556; Colwell v. Parker, 81 Kan. 295, 105 P. 524; Smith v. Mead Const. Co., 129 Kan. 229, 233, 282 708. Many other cases, both State and Federal, are cited as supporting the......
-
Jones v. Atchison, T. & S.F. Ry. Co.
... ... Union P. Ry. Co. v. Hutchinson, 40 Kan. 51, 53, 19 ... P. 312; Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Schroll, 76 ... Kan. 572, 92 P. 596; Colwell v. Parker, 81 Kan. 295, ... 105 P. 524; Johnson v. Oil & Gas Co., 114 Kan. 519, ... 220 P. 176; Winston v. McKnab, 134 Kan. 75, 4 P.2d ... ...
-
Luengene v. The Consumers Light
... ... Columbia, 65 Kan. 390, 69 P. 338; Rodgers v ... Railway Co., 75 Kan. 222, 88 P. 885; Gas Co. v ... Dabney, 79 Kan. 820, 102 P. 488; and Colwell v ... Parker, 81 Kan. 295, 105 P. 524, are cited in support of ... this proposition ... The ... principle enunciated in the cases ... ...