Kiker v. Hitt
Decision Date | 07 November 1914 |
Docket Number | 724 |
Citation | 189 Ala. 652,66 So. 632 |
Parties | KIKER v. HITT. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Law and Equity Court, Morgan County; Thomas W. Wert Judge.
Action by George Kiker pro. ami against H.H. Hitt. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
F.E St. John, of Cullman, and E.W. Godbey, of Decatur, for appellant.
Callahan & Harris, of Decatur, for appellee.
Plaintiff a boy 17 years of age, while working for defendant, in running a machine known as an edger, had his hand cut by its coming in contact with the saws of the machine.
The plaintiff's evidence shows that he knew of the dangers attending the work he was engaged in; in fact, the dangers were obvious. Moreover, he had been told of the danger by the person working with him and aiding him in the operation of the machine, and, in addition, had been cautioned by his father (his next friend in this action), who was present when plaintiff was put to work at this particular machine.
Walter Williams, a witness for plaintiff, the man who was working with him in operating the machine, testified that he cautioned plaintiff and told him he should be careful about his fingers. The plaintiff himself testified on this subject as follows:
As to how the injury happened, plaintiff, as a witness for himself, testified, among other things, as follows:
Appellant's main insistence in brief is that the trial court erred in giving several instructions to the jury at the request of the defendant. Those which merit special notice are numbered 32, 34, 35, and 37. These instructions were as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Thomas Furnace Co. v. Carroll
...in charge had intervened between plaintiff's contributory negligence and the resulting injury for which recovery is sought. Kyker v. Hitt, 189 Ala. 652, 66 So. 632; L. N.R.R. Co. v. Short, 197 Ala. 400, 73 So. 17. Under such respective theories of the proximate cause of intestate's injury, ......