Gould Steel Co. v. Richards

• Decision Date: 27 January 1903
• Citation: 66 N.E. 68,30 Ind.App. 348
• Parties: GOULD STEEL CO. v. RICHARDS.
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

30 Ind.App. 348

66 N.E. 68

GOULD STEEL CO.

v.RICHARDS.

Appellate Court of Indiana, Division No. 1.

Jan. 27, 1903.

Appeal from superior court, Madison county; Henry C. Ryan, Judge.

Action for personal injuries by Thomas Richards against the Gould Steel Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Miller, Elam & Fesler, Samuel D. Mills, and John W. Lovett, for appellant. John E. Wiley and Chipman, Keltner & Hendee, for appellee.

ROBINSON, J.

The complaint avers: That the appellant is a Virginia corporation, operating a factory in this state for casting and molding steel, and uses a large number of molds, a large iron hydraulic crane, and a large ladle. The molds are from 2 to 5 feet long, 2 to 3 feet wide, 1 to 2 feet deep, and consist of an upper and lower part fastened together with clamps. These molds, elevated from 5 to 15 inches above the floor, were placed side by side, forming an inner and outer circle, the latter being about 150 feet in circumference. In the center was an upright iron or steel shaft about 50 feet high, constructed so as to revolve. Attached to this shaft was a steel crane, about 25 feet in length, consisting of two arms swinging from the shaft and 6 or 7 feet apart at the outer end. Attached to these ends over the molds was a large ladle, used to hold melted steel, which was poured from the ladle into the molds. At the time of the injuries there had been left, after the molds were filled, a large amount of melted steel or slag, which appellant “carelessly and negligently poured out upon the ground immediately outside the outer circle of molds, and in close proximity thereto, and which spread, ran over and covered a large space of ground.” Appellant, through its agent, Lawrence Howard, had immediate control over the place and workmen at the time. On January 2, 1899, appellee was at work as a laborer in the molding department, and his duties did not subject him to any unusual danger, risk, or hazard. A part of his duty was to go upon the molds and remove the clamps. While so engaged, “and while near said molten slag, and while in a stooping position so attending to his said work as aforesaid, the defendant, by and through its said agent and representative, Lawrence Howard, without giving any notice, signal, or warning whatever of its intention so to do, then and there negligently, carelessly, and recklessly ordered and caused said crane and ladle to be pushed with great force and violence against him, the plaintiff.” That it was the duty of appellant and its agent to warn appellee that the crane was about to be started, in order to give appellee sufficient time to get out of the way, which they negligently failed to do. That appellant, through such agent, “then and there negligently and recklessly caused said crane to knock said plaintiff over and off said molds and into said molten steel or slag, which said defendant had as aforesaid negligently and recklessly poured out upon the ground, and near where plaintiff was working. That plaintiff, being then and there wholly occupied in the work he was ordered to do by said defendant and said defendant's agent, and which work plaintiff was doing, did not and could not see or hear the approaching crane and ladle, and did not and could not know it was approaching him until it struck him as aforesaid. That by reason of the crane and ladle being pushed violently against him by said defendant as aforesaid, he was violently knocked over and off of said molds and into said molten steel or slag, and thereby was greatly and grievously burned, maimed, bruised, hurt, and injured, and his left heel and foot were seriously burned and permanently injured, his left ankle greatly and permanently damaged, and his left shoulder bruised and hurt. That by reason thereof, and in consequence of said injuries, plaintiff's nervous system has been permanently injured, and his general health permanently impaired; and that said acts of said defendant and its agents were negligently and carelessly done, and that said injury was received by said plaintiff without any fault on his part contributing thereto.” That appellee was working under the commands of appellant and Howard, who knew that appellee was engaged in removing the clamps, and that the crane and ladle, when started, would hurt and injure appellee; and, so knowing, they carelessly and negligently caused the crane and ladle to be moved, and to knock appellee off the molds into the molten steel and slag, which had been carelessly and negligently placed near and adjacent to the place where appellee was compelled to and did work at his employment. The jury, in answer to interrogatories, find that, when injured, appellee had been in appellant's employ seven years, and had been employed in the casting and molding department about three years, and was working in this department when injured. He was well acquainted with the location of all the machinery, tools, and appliances used in this department, and with the manner of their operation and use. The business was necessarily attended with danger to employés, and with these dangers appellee was acquainted. By the order of Lawrence Howard, appellee at the time in question placed himself in a position of danger. He knew at the time he was injured that he was in a position of danger if the crane and ladle were moved. He could have known, by the exercise of reasonable care, that the position he took before his injury was a dangerous one if the crane and ladle were moved without warning. He knew the pool of slag had been drawn from the ladle, and the place on the floor where the pool was. There is no evidence that appellant was guilty of any act of negligence in putting the pool of slag on the ground or floor of the casting or molding department. During all the time appellee had worked at the factory it had been the custom to cast the molten slag upon the floor, and at and prior to appellee's injury he knew of this custom. The evidence did not show that there was any other way, or that others engaged in similar business had any other or better mode, of disposing of the slag than to cast it out of the ladle into a pool upon the floor. Appellee went upon the molds after the slag had been emptied upon the floor immediately north of the crane and ladle within two or three feet of the same. He knew that the crane and ladle were liable at any time to be moved in such a way as to pass over the molds on which he stood, and in that event that he would be struck with the crane and ladle if he remained there. The crane and ladle were south of appellee at the time of the injury. He had remained on the molds about three or four minutes before he received the injuries. Appellee was ordered to go upon the molds by the foreman to remove the clamps and wedges. This order was given about three or four minutes before he received his injury. It was not necessary for ap...