Komor v. Liberty Foundry Co.
Decision Date | 10 January 1928 |
Docket Number | No. 19727.,19727. |
Citation | 300 S.W. 1028 |
Parties | KOMOR v. LIBERTY FOUNDRY CO. |
Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Harry A. Rosskopf, Judge.
"Not to be officially published."
Action by William Komor against the Liberty Foundry Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Kelley, Starke & Hassett, of St. Louis, for appellant.
Jones, Mocker, Sullivan & Angert, of St. Louis, for respondent.
This is an action for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff while in the employ of defendant as a molder at its plant in the city of St. Louis.
The petition charges that plaintiff's injuries were directly caused by the negligence of defendant in this, to wit:
The answer denies generally the allegations of the petition, and charges by way of affirmative defense that the injuries sustained by plaintiff directly resulted from his own negligence, in that he negligently failed to step in a place of safety, and negligently failed to look where he was walking, when by the exercise of ordinary care he could have seen the floor upon which he was walking and any defects there were in the same, and could thereby have avoided any injury to himself.
The reply is a general denial.
The trial, with a jury, resulted in a verdict and judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
Plaintiff's testimony tends to show that he had been working for the defendant as a molder for over a year at the time he was injured; that his work consisted in making molds, and molding castings therein; that he worked on a dirt floor, which was covered with a layer of sand about an inch in thickness; that the sand was loose and moist; that the space within which he worked was about 10 feet wide and 30 feet long that customarily when he came to his work in the morning he began making molds, and continued at this work until about 3 o'clock in the afternoon; that he would then fill the molds with molten metal; that the molten metal was brought to his place of work in a large ladle; that he used a small hand ladle in transferring the molten metal from the large ladle to the molds; that the hand ladle held about a gallon of metal, and when filled the ladle with the metal in it weighed about 100 pounds; that the metal was poured from the large ladle into the hand ladle; that when the hand ladle was filled, plaintiff would grasp the handle of the ladle with his right hand nearest the ladle and with his left hand at the outer end of the handle, and thus carry the metal to the molds, and pour it from the hand ladle into the molds; that the handle to the hand ladle was about 4 feet long and was fixed to the ladle in a horizontal position; that in the process of molding, steam was generated, so that the place where he worked became dark on account of the steam; that in pouring the metal from the large ladle into the hand ladle, and in transferring the metal to the molds, the metal would sometimes overflow, or splash out of the hand ladle onto the floor; that the metal thus falling on the floor would cool in the form of globules or marbles, which would become buried in the sand; that the ground underneath the sand was hard, so that the globules would not sink into the ground, but would roll on the ground when stepped on; that the defendant, through servants employed for that purpose, customarily cleaned the floor where plaintiff worked, at intervals of once a week to once a month; that on these occasions the sand was run through a sieve, so that the globules were...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hulsey v. Quarry & Construction Co.
... ... 239, 68 L. Ed. 284; Walter v. Cement Co. (Mo.), 250 S.W. 587; Johnson v. Foundry Co. (Mo.), 259 S.W. 442; Choka v. Power Co., 303 Mo. 132. (d) The instruction does not assume ... Komor v. Foundry Co. (Mo. App.), 300 S.W. 1028; Lathem v. Hosch, 207 Mo. App. 381; American Auto. Inc ... Q. Had he ever told you two men were enough before? A. No, sir. Q. You had always been at liberty to call on each other when you needed help? A. Yes, sir. Q. And while you had worked there from ... ...
-
Hulsey v. Tower Grove Quarry & Construction Co.
... ... 63 U.S. 239, 68 L.Ed. 284; Walter v. Cement Co ... (Mo.), 250 S.W. 587; Johnson v. Foundry Co ... (Mo.), 259 S.W. 442; Choka v. Power Co., 303 ... Mo. 132. (d) The instruction does not ... submitted to them by plaintiff's Instruction 4. Komor ... v. Foundry Co. (Mo. App.), 300 S.W. 1028; Lathem v ... Hosch, 207 Mo.App. 381; American ... ever told you two men were enough before? A. No, sir. Q. You ... had always been at liberty to call on each other when you ... needed help? A. Yes, sir. Q. And while you had worked there ... ...
-
Schwartz v. S. S. Kresge Co.
... ... National Biscuit Co., 3 ... S.W.2d 254; Wood v. Walgreen Drug Stores, 125 S.W.2d ... 534; Komor v. Liberty Foundry Co., 300 S.W. 1028 ... (b) Defendants breached their duty to plaintiff ... ...
-
Jacob v. Peerless White Lime Co.
... ... withdrawn in doubt, or intermingled with other matters ... properly in the case. Komor v. Foundry Co. (Mo ... App.), 300 S.W. 1028; Latham v. Hosch, 207 ... Mo.App. 381; American ... ...