Girard v. Grosvenordale Co.

• Decision Date: 19 January 1910
• Citation: 83 Conn. 20,74 A. 1126
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: GIRARD v. GROSVENORDALE CO.

74 A. 1126

83 Conn. 20

GIRARD

v. GROSVENORDALE CO.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

Jan. 19, 1910.

Appeal from Superior Court, Windham County; William L. Bennett, Judge.

Action by Ferdinand Girard against the Grosvenordale Company. From a judgment for defendant after the granting of motion for nonsuit and denying a motion to set it aside, plaintiff appeals. Error, and new trial ordered.

Donald G. Perkins, for appellant.

Charles B. Searls and Edward C. Stone, for appellee.

BALDWIN, C. J. This cause came before us at a previous term on an appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff, and the averments in the complaint, as well as certain conceded facts, are stated in the report of our decision. 82 Conn. 271, 73 Atl. 747. On the second trial the evidence introduced by the plaintiff was such that, if taken in the most favorable light for him, the jury would have been justified in regarding it as sufficient to establish, among other things, the following state of facts:

While scouring a frame in a room in the fourth story of the defendant's mill known as the "new room," from which a door opened into a smaller room known as the "ell spinning room," one Johnson, the "second hand," or second in authority in the new room, told him that the overseer of both rooms and also of the "warp room" in the second story (one Eaton) wished to see him (Girard) after he had finished the work he was then engaged in. As soon as he had finished it, he went to Eaton's office, which was on the second story, and, not finding him there, returned to the "new room," and thence went into the ell spinning room. His purpose in going into the latter was to find Eaton. As soon as he went through the door, he saw that Eaton was not there, and also observed that a metal pulley 42 inches in diameter, was broken and out of balance. The break had occurred a few minutes before. He saw that the pulley was "thrashing and beating" in a way to shake the shafting with which it was connected and the hangers by means of which the shafting was suspended from the ceiling. He knew that this might affect the counter shafting, which was hung under the ceiling and connected by belting with the main shafting, and that, if the main shafting dropped, it would be likely to pull down the counter shafting. He did not, however, think the main shafting would drop. He learned that Eaton had been sent for, and, expecting him to come soon, waited a little while for him to appear. In the meantime he (Girard), noticing that some boys and girls employed in the ell spinning room were directly under the main shafting at the point where the pulley was, stepped into the room and chased them away, fearing that bits of the pulley might break off and do them harm. Eaton then came in through a door called the "card room door," at the other end of the room, looked at the pulley, and went out. The plaintiff felt sure that Eaton would give him no orders until the pulley had been attended to, and did not address him. After a little while he (Eaton) returned, stopped a short time, and went away again. Very soon afterwards Eaton again returned, and then again started to go back. Soon after Girard entered the ell spinning room, Johnson entered it, observed the broken pulley, and was told by Girard that Eaton had gone down to older the power shut off. Johnson remained, looking at the pulley four or five minutes, until the shafting fell. Another scourer had come there after Girard, and told him (Girard) that the second hand of the warp room had gone down to the engine room and told the engineer to shut off the power, and that they were going to do this. The steam could have been shut off by the turn of a wheel in two seconds, but it would have been two minutes before everything would have come to a full stop. Girard on a previous occasion had seen a pulley broken in a similar way at the same point, and knew that then the power had been promptly shut off. On this occasion it was not shut off until some five minutes after he first entered the ell spinning room, nor until part of the counter shafting had fallen upon the plaintiff, causing the injuries which were the subject of the action. The main shafting of the room, if properly constructed, ought not to have fallen in consequence of such a break in the pulley, until there had been time to shut off the power after notice of the break. Girard was in the middle of the ell spinning room, 50 or 60 feet from the broken pulley, when he saw the shafting give way. He then ran towards the card room door, but was struck before he reached it. During all the time the plaintiff was in the ell spinning room he had occupied himself in...