Commonwealth Steel Co. v. McCash

Decision Date03 January 1911
Docket Number1,706.
Citation184 F. 882
PartiesCOMMONWEALTH STEEL CO. v. McCASH.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit

Decedent a marker in defendant's steel foundry, was killed by being struck by a heavy piece of steel broken from the body of a steel car body in process of manufacture. After the cars were molded in the process of manufacture, a mass of steel called a "gate" was attached to the body of the car, which was required to be removed by cutting or breaking. It was usual to break off this "gate" by means of a drop working somewhat like a pile driver; the appliances being so adjusted that when the gate was broken off, it dropped in the soft sand below. Decedent, at the time he was killed, was at work some 25 or 30 feet from the drop, with his back toward the car body from which the gate was about to be broken, and while so engaged the gate, after being struck by the drop, was whirled through the air and struck deceased at the back of the head and neck, causing injuries from which he died. No such accident had ever happened before in the course of many years, and though nine witnesses testified who had worked in the same business for years, none of them were able to tell how the accident occurred. Held insufficient to show actionable negligence, under the rule that there must be proved a danger, either known, or which by reasonable diligence could have been ascertained by defendant.

This is an action brought by the administrator of a young man who lost his life in the employ of the Commonwealth Steel Company, plaintiff in error. The question is whether the injury was negligent or accidental. The company has been for many years engaged in manufacturing car bodies for passenger cars, made of steel. They are molded, and then taken to the finishing department, in which the accident occurred. In molding these bodies the melted steel is conducted into the mold by means of so-called runs. These runs are somewhat in the shape of an elongated three-pronged pitchfork with the tines coming together where the molten steel is poured. The mold of the car body is filled up with this steel, and also the runs, so that, when the mass is cooled, there is firmly attached to one end of the car body the steel which was left in the run, and which is called a gate, which must be detached either by cutting or breaking. The gate is about 42 inches long and 2 1/2 inches wide, weighing 180 pounds. The double body, with the gate attached, is taken up by a crane in a large building, 125 feet by 300 feet, carried down the center of the building, and finally deposited on one side upon large blocks of iron or steel, so that, when the body is at rest, it is about 18 inches from the floor, and so adjusted that the end of the double body slightly projects beyond the edge of one of the steel blocks; the floor at this point being covered with sand. Over the gate there is employed what is called a 'drop,' working somewhat like a pile driver. A steel block, measuring 18 inches square at the base and about the same at the top, and 3 feet in length, is hung by a rope over the gate, so that it can be raised about 30 feet above the gate. The drop is worked by machinery.

The process of breaking off the gate is as follows: The steel block is suspended above it, and let down over it to obtain the proper position. Before this is done, however, the point of connection between the gate and steel body is weakened by chiseling, so that the gate may be broken squarely off from the body. When the drop block is properly adjusted, it is suddenly released and falls upon...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Legan & McClure Lumber Co. v. Fairchild
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • November 4, 1929
    ...Bros. Co., 181 Iowa 504, 164 N.W. 739, L.R.A. 1918B, 854; Jackson Lbr. Co. v. Lawford, 204 Ala. 83, 85 So. 262; Commonwealth Steel Co. v. McCash, 184 F. 882, 107 C.C.A. 206; Wilbourn v. Charleston Cooperage Co., 90 So. 9, 127 Miss. 290. Decedent had no duty to perform for appellant in engin......
  • Denver Park & Amusement Co. v. Pflug
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • December 9, 1924
    ...a duty to guard against what did happen. Railroad Co. v. Elliott, 55 F. 949, 5 C. C. A. 347, 20 L. R. A. 582; Commonwealth Steel Co. v. McCash, 184 F. 882, 107 C. C. A. 206; Great Northern Railway Co. v. Johnson, 207 F. 521, 125 C. C. A. 183; Motey v. Pickle Marble & Granite Co., 74 F. 155,......
  • St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company v. Copeland
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • May 4, 1914
    ...is conclusive. 3 Labatt, § 1036; 91 Cal. 48; 51 Hun. 519; 78 Mo.App. 39; 58 Am. Rep. 522; 115 A.D. 14; 18 L.R.A. (N.S.) 701; 61 Wis. 325; 184 F. 882; 60 Am. Rep. 9. Master not liable for accidental injury. 1 White, Pers. Inj., § 33; 91 Ark. 260; 86 Id. 289; 92 Id. 138; 87 Id. 576; 97 Id. 57......
  • In re Dwyer
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • January 5, 1911

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