Hammond Ranch Corp. v. Dodson

Decision Date22 January 1940
Docket Number4-5748
Citation136 S.W.2d 484,199 Ark. 846
PartiesTHE HAMMOND RANCH CORPORATION v. DODSON
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

Appeal from Chicot Circuit Court; DuVal L. Purkins, Judge; affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

J T. Cheairs, for appellants.

Carneal Warfield, for appellees.

OPINION

HOLT J.

Appellees, Stedman Dodson and Mrs. J. D. Williams, filed separate suits in the Chicot circuit court against appellants, The Hammond Ranch Corporation and Homer Ricks, to recover damages growing out of the alleged negligence of appellants in spreading arsenic poisoning, resulting in injury and death to certain stock. The actions were consolidated for trial.

Appellee Dodson alleged in his complaint that appellants employed the Silver Fleet Dusting Company to spread arsenic poison over a field of cotton belonging to them and adjacent to appellee's pasture; that the poison spray was spread by means of an airplane, and that appellants wantonly and negligently spread the poison over appellee's pasture, rendering same unfit for use for a period of seven days and causing the death by poison of one heifer of the value of $ 25, one mule the value of $ 125, and damages in the sum of $ 15 paid out for hay by appellee for his stock, or a total of $ 165.

Appellant, Hammond Ranch Corporation, filed separate answer denying every material allegation of appellee, and further alleged that it had nothing to do with the employment of the dusting company in question, was not responsible for its acts, and that, if such company were employed to spread the poisonous spray, it was at the instance of Homer Ricks, and that it is in no way liable for same.

Appellant, Homer Ricks, answered denying every material allegation set out in appellee's complaint.

Appellee, Mrs. J. D. Williams, in her complaint made similar allegations to those set out by Dodson and claimed damages for the death of one Jersey milk cow of the value of $ 75 and one part Jersey milk cow of the value of $ 50, or a total of $ 125. To this complaint, appellants filed answers similar to those in the Dodson case.

Upon a trial to a jury a verdict was returned in favor of appellee Dodson in the sum of $ 100 and for Mrs. Williams in the sum of $ 125. From a judgment on these verdicts comes this appeal.

The evidence, as reflected by the record, stated in its most favorable light to appellees, is to the following effect:

The pastures of appellees adjoined the land occupied by appellant, Ricks, who was the tenant of The Hammond Ranch Corporation, owner of the property which Hicks occupied.

An employee of appellant, Hammond Ranch Corporation, testified that appellant, Homer Ricks, was a tenant of the Ranch" on the third and fourth"; that if any tenant wanted his cotton dusted or the arsenic poison spray spread over it, he might do so, that it was optional. If the tenant did have his cotton dusted, then the appellant Ranch furnished and paid for one-fourth of the poison used in spraying; and that The Hammond Ranch Corporation paid for one-fourth of the poison spray used by appellant, Ricks.

This witness further testified that when the Silver Fleet Dusting Company (quoting from his testimony) "came in there to do this they came up there to see me. They said they had an entomologist going over the place looking at the fields where it needed poison, and I told them that where it needed to be poisoned, that where it was all right with the tenant they could go ahead, if it was all right with the tenant. But the tenants, where we had security for our money, it didn't matter."

Appellee, Dodson, testified that on Sunday morning, August 15, 1937, an airplane passed over his pasture a little after sun-up; that he was standing on his porch and saw the airplane scattering the poison, but did not know it was poison at the time; that he would fly over his pasture, circle and then drop down and go back over appellants' field, make another circle and come back over his pasture and the pasture of appellee, Mrs. Williams. The operator of the plane did not cut off his poison spray when he made the circles. Appellee's pasture contains 20 acres. He immediately went to his pasture and saw something white all over the ground, and on the same day one of his mules got sick and one of his cows was down. He immediately called Dr. Moore, and after he had examined the animals said they were poisoned. One of his heifers of the value of $ 25, in the pasture at the time, died that day, and he thought she died from poison. The mule valued at $ 1.25 died three or four months later. A Mr. Bufkin, bookkeeper for appellant, Hammond Ranch Corporation, told witness that the Hammond Ranch Corporation was paying for the airplane and dusting. None of the animals were sick before the cotton was sprayed with the poison except the mule which had a carbuncle. No autopsy was performed on the stock. He watered the yearling on Saturday, and when he went back to look for his cows on the following Sunday, the day of the spraying, he found the yearling dead.

Appellee, Mrs. Williams, testified that she was not at home on the Sunday morning the poison was spread on her pasture, but returned that night. She found two of her Jersey cows sick. They kept getting worse until they died, two weeks later. She had a doctor with them, and he said they were poisoned. One of the cows was of the value of $ 75 and the other, $ 25.

A Mr A. L. Parker testified on behalf of appellees. We set out the abstract of his testimony as copied from appellants' brief: "I live out east of Chicot. I know Mrs. Williams and Stedman Dodson. Live near both of them. Both of them had a pasture near Homer Ricks' field in 1937. I saw the airplane sailing over right where I live. I hadn't got up yet. It come right on over my house and went over Mr. Ricks and hit his cotton south and then went north. Then he turned west and failed to shut the poison off. He came right by Mrs. Williams across her pasture to Mr. Dodson's. The poison was on all the way; it never did shut off. I live one-half mile of Mrs. Williams and Mr. Dodson. I generally pass there once a week. I seen the stock in there that Sunday. I passed there in an hour after the plane put poison in the pastures, and saw poison all over the leaves and grass. I didn't see any dead animals Sunday morning, but did Oil my way back when I found...

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 cases
  • Mccorkle Farms, Inc. v. Thompson
    • United States
    • Arkansas Court of Appeals
    • September 18, 2002
    ...Heeb v. Prysock, 219 Ark. 899, 245 S.W.2d 577 (1952); McKennon v. Jones, 219 Ark. 671, 244 S.W.2d 138 (1951); Hammond Ranch Corp. v. Dodson, 199 Ark. 846, 136 S.W.2d 484 (1940). In McKennon v. Jones, supra, a pesticide spray was used and resulted in the killing of honey bees and the destruc......
  • Brown v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Arkansas
    • May 10, 1972
    ...the wrongful acts or negligence of such contractor. Rice v. Sheppard (1943), 205 Ark. 193, 168 S.W.2d 198; Hammond Ranch Corporation v. Dodson (1940), 199 Ark. 846, 136 S.W.2d 484; Froman v. J. R. Kelley Stave & Heading Co. (1939), 197 Ark. 545, 123 S.W.2d 1081; Humphries v. Kendall (1937),......
  • Yancey v. Watkins
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • March 24, 2011
    ...activities in this context “have been held to include ... spraying from airplanes.” 7 The rationale for this view was stated in Hammond Ranch Corp. v. Dodson: 8 [T]he law will not allow one who has a piece of work to be done that is necessarily or inherently dangerous to escape liability to......
  • Reeves v. John A. Cooper Company
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Arkansas
    • October 15, 1969
    ...the wrongful acts or negligence of such contractor. Rice v. Sheppard (1943), 205 Ark. 193, 168 S.W.2d 198; Hammond Ranch Corporation v. Dodson (1940), 199 Ark. 846, 136 S.W.2d 484; Froman v. J. R. Kelley Stave & Heading Co. (1939), 197 Ark. 545, 123 S.W.2d 1081; Humphries v. Kendall (1937),......
  • 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