Henne v. J.T. Steeb Shipping Co.

• Court: Washington Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: RUDKIN, J.
• Citation: Henne v. J.T. Steeb Shipping Co., 79 P. 938, 37 Wash. 331 (Wash. 1905)
• Decision Date: 04 March 1905
• Parties: HENNE v. J. T. STEEB SHIPPING CO.

79 P. 938

37 Wash. 331

HENNE v. J. T. STEEB SHIPPING CO.

Supreme Court of Washington

March 4, 1905

Appeal from Superior Court, Pierce County; Thad Huston, Judge.

Action by Sam Henne against the J. T. Steeb Shipping Company. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.

James M. Ashton and W. H. Hayden, for appellant.

W. H Harris, for respondent.

RUDKIN J.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries. On the 2d day of October, 1903, the defendant corporation was engaged in loading a cargo of lumber in the hold of the United States steamship Dix, at the wharves in the city of Tacoma. The plaintiff was in the employ of the defendant corporation, and was engaged in stowing the lumber in the hold of the vessel. The lumber was transferred from scows to the steamship in a rope sling, by means of steam winches on the steamship, and thence lowered through the hatchway into the hold. On the date above mentioned this rope sling broke, and the lumber contained in the sling fell through the hatchway, and struck the plaintiff, thereby causing the injury complained of. The complaint alleged that it was the duty of the defendant corporation to use the best, safest, and strongest slings available, or that could be procured, for the purpose of loading the lumber into the steamship, and alleged negligence in the fulfillment of that duty as follows: 'The defendant, through the carelessness and gross negligent acts of its said servants and employés on the main deck of said vessel, who were working under the direction of its duly authorized foreman, used a rope sling which had been lying in a locker of said steamer for a long while, and had become rotten and unsafe for the purpose of raising and lowering heavy parcels of lumber into the hold of said vessel; that on account of and through said negligence and carelessness of the defendant's said servants, employés, and foreman in the use of said defective sling, while lowering said parcels of lumber through the hatch of said vessel said sling broke and let said parcel of lumber fall,' etc that the officers, foreman, and servants of the defendant corporation well knew that said rope sling was dangerous unsafe, and not sufficiently strong to carry a large parcel of lumber such as the same was carrying at the time of the accident. The answer denied the material allegations of the complaint, and alleged affirmatively assumption of risk and contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff. A verdict was returned for the plaintiff, and from the judgment entered this appeal is prosecuted.

The first error assigned is based upon the insufficiency of the complaint. As already stated, the complaint alleged that it was the duty of the appellant to furnish the...