Graham v. Brummett, 33176

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
Writing for the CourtMcGowen, J.
Citation181 So. 721,182 Miss. 580
PartiesGRAHAM v. BRUMMETT
Decision Date06 June 1938
Docket Number33176

181 So. 721

182 Miss. 580

GRAHAM
v.
BRUMMETT

No. 33176

Supreme Court of Mississippi

June 6, 1938


Division A

Suggestion Of Error Overruled June 20, 1938.

APPEAL from the circuit court of Hinds county, HON. JULIAN P. ALEXANDER, Judge.

Action by W. M. Brummett against Eugene Graham, etc., for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff as a servant of the defendant. From an adverse judgment, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

[182 Miss. 581] Watkins & Eager, of Jackson, for appellant.

The lower court should have granted the peremptory instruction requested by appellant because: (1) The evidence wholly fails to show that any negligence of the appellant proximately contributed to appellee's injuries; (2) The undisputed evidence shows that appellee in attempting to descend from the scaffold chose an obviously dangerous route when there were at his disposal other obviously safer methods of descent.

LaBatt's Master & Servant, sec. 1249; 5 Thompson on Negligence, sec. 5372; Batson Hatten Lbr. Co. v. Thames, 114 So. 25, 147 Miss. 794; Williams Cooperage Co. v. Hedrick, 159 F. 680; Cobb Bros. v. Campbell, 170 So. 293; Stokes v. Adams-Newell Lbr. Co., 151 Miss. 711, 118 So. 441; Overt Land & Lbr. Co. v. Adams, 69 So. 499, 109 Miss. 740; Buckeye Cotton Oil Co. v. Saffold, 125 Miss. 407, 87 So. 893; Ten Mile Lbr. Co. v. Garner, 117 Miss. 814, 78 So. 776; Whatley v. Anderson-Tully Co., 12 F.2d 268; Brown v. Coley, 168 Miss. 778, 152 So. 61; Eastman-Gardiner Hardwood Co. v. Chatham, 168 Miss. 471, 151 So. 556; Martin v. Beck, 177 Miss. 303, 171 So. 14; Hardy v. Turner-Farber-Love Co., 101 So. 489; [182 Miss. 582] Truly v. North Lbr. Co., 83 Miss. 430, 36 So. 4; A. L. I., Restatement of the Law of Torts, sec. 500; American Linseed Co. v. Heins, 141 F. 45; Fritz v. Salt Lake Co., 56 P. 90.

The evidence upon which liability was based is insufficient to support a verdict, being against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, incredible and improbable and so weak as to conclusively show that the jurors misapprehended the legal effect of the instructions and so misapprehended the principles of law governing the case.

Universal Truck Loading Co. v. Taylor, 174 Miss. 353, 164 So. 3; Teche Lines, Inc. v. Dewey Bounds, 179 So. 747; Y. & M. V. R. R. Co. v. Lamensdorf, 178 So. 80; Teche Lines v. Mason, 144 So. 383; Mobile & O. R. Co. v. Johnson, 164 Miss. 397, 141 So. 581; Columbus & G. Ry. v. Buford, 150 Miss. 832, 116 So. 817; Railroad Co. v. Enochs, 42 Miss. 603; Hill v. Jones, 18 Ann. Cas. 359.

The court erred in instructing the jury to find for the plaintiff if the jury believed that the defendant was negligent in maintaining the plank walkway "as testified by plaintiff and his witnesses."

Y. & M. V. R. R. Co. v. Cornelius, 131 Miss. 37, 95 So. 90; Gurley v. Tucker, 155 So. 189; Eagle Cotton Oil Co. v. Pickett, 175 Miss. 577, 166 So. 764; McDonough Motor Express, Inc. v. Spiers, 176 So. 723.

The court should have sustained defendant's motion for a mistrial when plaintiff's attorney in qualifying a juror, asked said juror in the presence and hearing of the other members of the jury, the following question: "Mr. Williams, do you own any stock in any insurance companies or corporations ?"

Herrin, Lambert & Co. v. Daly, 80 Miss. 340; Mississippi Ice & Utilities v. Pearce, 161 Miss. 252, 134 So. 164; Avery v. Collins, 157 So. 695; Whatley v. Boolas, 177 So. 1.

The court erred in allowing an X-ray technician to interpret [182 Miss. 583] an X-ray picture expressing opinions which he was not shown to have been qualified to express.

Maloy's Legal Anatomy & Surgery, page 729; Wigmore's "The Science of Judicial Proof" (3 Ed.) 1937, pages 475, 477 and 478; Saas v. Hindmarsh, 184 N.Y.S. 467; Liles v. Hannah Pickett Mills, 150 S.E. 363; Miss. Power & Light Co. v. Jordan, 164 Miss. 174, 143 So. 483; Beard v. Turritin, 173 Miss. 206, 161 So. 688.

The court erred in refusing to allow appellant to show a method of descent from the scaffold available to appellee which had been used daily by employees for eighteen months preceding the accident in its same condition and that no employee had received an injury while using same.

Southern Ry. v. McLellan, 80 Miss. 700, 32 So. 283; Smith Lbr. Co. v. McLean, 202 Ala. 32, 79 So. 370; Barnett v. Coal & Coke Co., 81 W.Va. 251, 95 S.E. 150; Ingrain v. Prairie Block Coal Co., 319 Mo. 644, 5 S.W.2d 413.

The verdict of the jury in this case is so excessive that it evidences passion and prejudice on the part of the jury.

Postal Telegraph Co. v. Scott, 79 So. 767.

Barnett, Jones & Barnett and John E. Stone, all of Jackson, for appellee.

Proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries is question for jury and not for the court.

Moulton v. St. Jones Lbr. Co., 120 P. 1057; Perry v. Davis & Sargent Lbr. Co., 102 N.E. 320; Boyles v. Columbian Fireproofing Co., 64 N.E. 726; Aetna Powder Co. v. Earlandson, 33 Ind.App. 251; Rustan v. Southern Alaska Canning Co., 205 P. 369; Mid-Continent Petroleum Corp. v. Hane, 56 F.2d 989; Headrick v. Williams Cooperate Co., 134 S.W. 957; Brady v. Florence & C. C. R. Co., 98 P. 321; Johnson v. St. Louis & S. F. Co., 141 S.W. 475, 160 Mo.App. 69; Norris v. Cudahy Packing Co., [182 Miss. 584] 100 N.W. 853; Lauter v. Duckworth, 48 N.E. 864; Swarm-Day Lbr. Co. v. Thomas, 112 S.W. 907; Mahoney v. Beatman, 110 Conn. 184, 147 A. 762; 22 R. C. L., page 148, and Perm. Supp., page 5186; Hardy v. Turner-Farber-Love Co., 101 So. 489; Cotton Mill Products Co. v. Oliver 121 So. 111; White v. Louisville, N. O. & T. Ry., 72 Miss. 12, 16 So. 248; Magers v. Okolona, Houston & Calhoun City R. Co., 105 So. 416; Wilbe Lbr. Co. v. Calhoun, 140 So. 680; Reynolds-West Lbr. Co. v. Taylor, 23 F. 1336; Strickland v. Harvey, 179 So. 345; Sec. 513, Code of 1930.

The jury was correctly instructed as to the law principle governing.

Hammond v. Morris, 126 So. 906; St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Ault, 58 So. 102.

There was no error in counsel for appellee questioning the prospective juror on his ownership, if any, of stock in an insurance company or corporation.

Yazoo City v. Loggins, 110 So. 833; Avery v. Collins, 157 So. 695; Merchants Co. v. Tracy, 166 So. 340; Lee County Gin Co. v. Middlebrooks, 137 So. 108; Blair v. McCormick Const. Co., 107 N.Y.S. 750; Murphy v. Shaffer, 208 P. 1003; Tissue v. Durin, 246 N.W. 806; Billings v. Aldridge, 3 P.2d 639; Barrett v. Harman, 1 P.2d 458; Jolly v. Smith, 65 S.W.2d 908; Iriquois Furnace Co. v. McCrea, 61 N.E. 79.

The court did not err in allowing Dr. Parmalee to testify in regard to the X-ray pictures.

Liles v. Hannah Pickett Mills, Inc., 197 N.C. 772, 150 S.E. 363; State v. Matheson, 120, N.W. 1036; Ladlie v. American Glycerin Co., 223 P. 272; Whipple v. Grand- champ, 158 N.E. 270, 57 A.L.R. 974; Saas v. Hindmarsh, 184 N.Y.S. 467; Rawleigh v. Donoho, 38 S.W.2d 277; Beard v. Turritin, 161 So. 688.

The court did not err in refusing to allow the appellee to show a method of descent from the scaffold for eighteen months preceding the accident in the same condition and that no employee had received an injury while using same.

Texas Co. v. Mills, 156 So. 866; Southern Ry. Co. v. McLellan, 32 So. 283; Jones on Evidence, Civil Cases (3 Ed. ), sec. 163.

The verdict of the jury is not excessive and does not evince any passion or prejudice on its part.

American Digest System, Damages, Key No. 127 et seq.

Argued orally by Tom Watkins, for appellant, and by Ross R. Barnett, for appellee.

OPINION

[182 Miss. 585] McGowen, J.

Brummett, the appellee, recovered a judgment against the appellant, Graham, for personal injuries sustained by him as the servant of the latter while about the performance of his duties.

Tersely stated, the essential facts are these: The appellee testified that there were two scaffolds, an upper scaffold approximately fourteen feet above the concrete floor of the stave mill in which he was working for the appellant; and a lower one, approximately a foot and a half below the upper scaffold; that the upper scaffold consisted of two by eight inch planks, which ran east by west, parallel with each other and approximately two feet apart: that he ascended to the upper scaffold upon a ladder which was resting against the first board...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 practice notes
  • Jolly v. State, No. 46995
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • November 27, 1972
    ...this instruction is tantamount to a reversible error. See, i.e., Moak v. Black, 230 Miss. 337, 92 So.2d 845 (1957); Graham v. Brummett, 182 Miss. 580, 181 So. 721 The appellant next argues that the lower court erred in permitting Justice of the Peace R. K. Owen to testify over appellant's o......
  • M. & A. Motor Freight Lines v. Villere, 34486.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • April 28, 1941
    ...declaration and developed by the evidence. McDonough Motor Express v. Spiers, 180 Miss. 78, 176 So. 723, 177 So. 655; Graham v. Brummett, 182 Miss. 580, 181 So. 721. The other instruction is as follows: "The court charges the jury, for the defendant, that in passing on the credit to be give......
  • Rawlings v. Royals, No. 38311
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • May 19, 1952
    ...New Orleans & N. E. R. R. Co. v. Miles, 197 Miss. 846, 20 So.2d 657; Hines v. McCullers, 21 Miss. 666, 83 So. 734; Graham v. Brummett, 182 Miss. 580, 181 So. 721; Ross v. Louisville & N. R. R. Co., 181 Miss. 795, 181 So. 133; Yazoo & M. V. R. R. Co. v. Aultman, 179 Miss. 109, 173 So. A revi......
  • Gore v. Patrick, No. 42541
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • February 25, 1963
    ...New Orleans & N. E. R. R. Co. v. Miles, 197 Miss. 846, 20 So.2d 657; Hines v. McCullers, 121 Miss. 666, 83 So. 734; Graham v. Brummett, 182 Miss. 580, 181 So. 721; Ross v. Louisville & N. R. R. Co., 181 Miss. 795, 181 So. 133; Yazoo & M. V. R. R. Co. v. Aultman, 179 Miss. 109, 173 So. All o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
11 cases
  • Jolly v. State, No. 46995
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • November 27, 1972
    ...this instruction is tantamount to a reversible error. See, i.e., Moak v. Black, 230 Miss. 337, 92 So.2d 845 (1957); Graham v. Brummett, 182 Miss. 580, 181 So. 721 The appellant next argues that the lower court erred in permitting Justice of the Peace R. K. Owen to testify over appellant's o......
  • M. & A. Motor Freight Lines v. Villere, 34486.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • April 28, 1941
    ...declaration and developed by the evidence. McDonough Motor Express v. Spiers, 180 Miss. 78, 176 So. 723, 177 So. 655; Graham v. Brummett, 182 Miss. 580, 181 So. 721. The other instruction is as follows: "The court charges the jury, for the defendant, that in passing on the credit to be......
  • Rawlings v. Royals, No. 38311
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • May 19, 1952
    ...Orleans & N. E. R. R. Co. v. Miles, 197 Miss. 846, 20 So.2d 657; Hines v. McCullers, 21 Miss. 666, 83 So. 734; Graham v. Brummett, 182 Miss. 580, 181 So. 721; Ross v. Louisville & N. R. R. Co., 181 Miss. 795, 181 So. 133; Yazoo & M. V. R. R. Co. v. Aultman, 179 Miss. 109, 173 So......
  • Gore v. Patrick, No. 42541
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • February 25, 1963
    ...Orleans & N. E. R. R. Co. v. Miles, 197 Miss. 846, 20 So.2d 657; Hines v. McCullers, 121 Miss. 666, 83 So. 734; Graham v. Brummett, 182 Miss. 580, 181 So. 721; Ross v. Louisville & N. R. R. Co., 181 Miss. 795, 181 So. 133; Yazoo & M. V. R. R. Co. v. Aultman, 179 Miss. 109, 173 S......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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