Kutchera v. Goodwillie

• Decision Date: 22 May 1896
• Citation: 93 Wis. 448,67 N.W. 729
• Parties: KUTCHERA v. GOODWILLIE ET AL.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

93 Wis. 448

67 N.W. 729

KUTCHERA

v.GOODWILLIE ET AL.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

May 22, 1896.

Appeal from circuit court, Marathon county; Charles V. Bardeen, Judge.

Action by Peter Kutchera by guardian ad litem against James G. Goodwillie and another for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Reversed.Mylrea, Marchette & Bird and Gabe Bouck, for appellants.

Bump & Kreutzer, for respondent.

CASSODAY, C. J.

In January, 1894, the defendants owned and operated a box factory in Wausau. There was a pony planer in that factory, the knives being attached to a cylinder, which made about 3,500 revolutions per minute when in operation. These knives were uncovered, except a bonnet projected over the center of the knife shaft. The pieces of boards which came through the planer under the knives came out upon the bedplate and a table. The table was 4 feet long, 2 feet high, and 2 feet wide. The gearing projected 16 1/2 inches outside of the frame. The bedplate was 11 inches above the table, and the top knives 16 1/2 inches above the table. The plaintiff was injured January 25, 1894. He had worked at the planer 1 1/2 days at the time. In doing such work he stood on the south side of the table, and facing it and the north. The boards were placed in the planer on the east side of it, and came out on the west side, and fell onto the table; and it was the business of the plaintiff, who was at the time less than 11 years old, to take away the pieces of boards as they dropped from the planer onto the table. While so at work, the plaintiff's right hand was caught and drawn in by the knives of the planer, so as to make amputation below the elbow necessary. This action was brought to recover damages for such injury. The answer consists of admissions and denials. At the close of the trial the jury returned a special verdict to the effect that the defendants ought reasonably to have known or anticipated that there was danger to a workman of the age, intelligence, and experience of the plaintiff, while exercising ordinary care, of slipping and getting his hand into the knives of the planer while in the performance of his duties at such machine; that the plaintiff did not know and understand, nor ought he, in the exercise of ordinary care, to have known and understood, the risks and dangers to him from the machine in question while in the performance of his duties, taking into consideration his age, experience, and understanding; that the plaintiff was injured while acting in the line of his employment; that the plaintiff was not guilty of any want of ordinary care at the time of the accident, which contributed to the injury; that the plaintiff sustained damages by reason of his injury to the amount of $3,500. From the judgment entered thereon accordingly, pursuant to the order of the...