Laidley v. Wm. Musser Lumber & Mfg. Co.
| Decision Date | 04 January 1907 |
| Citation | 45 Wash. 239,88 P. 124 |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
| Parties | LAIDLEY v. WM. MUSSER LUMBER & MFG. CO. |
Appeal from Superior Court, Spokane County; W. A. Huneke, Judge.
Action by Thomas B. Laidley against the William Musser Lumber & Manufacturing Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Richardson Roche & Onstine, for appellant.
Post Avery & Higgins, for respondent.
This is an action brought by the appellant against the respondent to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the appellant while in the employ of the respondent. At the close of the introduction of testimony by the appellant, the respondent challenged the sufficiency of the evidence and moved the court to render judgment in favor of the respondent on the ground that the appellant had not shown any negligence upon the part of the respondent, but had shown that the appellant was guilty of contributory negligence, which motion the court granted on the ground that the appellant was guilty of contributory negligence. Appellant contends that the lower court erred: First, in granting respondent's motion challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. Second, in overruling appellant's motion for a new trial. Third, in refusing to allow appellant to introduce evidence at the trial showing the use and purpose of the conveyor in the sawmill and its condition at the time of the accident.
For the purpose of discussing these questions the court must consider all the facts in the case as favorable to the appellant as the evidence introduced at the trial will reasonably permit of; that is, the jury being judges of the evidence in the case, the court, in determining these questions, must consider that the jury would find the facts in the case as favorable to the appellant as the evidence would reasonably justify if the case had been submitted to them. This being true, appellant contends that the evidence justifies the following statement of facts, to wit: That the respondent is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of Washington, and, during the times mentioned in appellant's complaint, was running and operating a saw and planing mill in the city of Spokane. That the respondent had in use and in operation in said mill during said time a certain circular ripsaw which was run and operated at a high rate of speed by means of revolving belts and shafting propelled by steam. That said ripsaw consisted of a large table, the top of which was about 4 feet wide, 5 feet long and 1 1/8 inches thick. That the top was supported by four legs which were held together by cross pieces. Each of the legs were about 5 1/2 or 6 inches square. The table was about 3 feet high. The saw was about 12 inches in diameter, was fastened to a revolving arbor or axle which worked on bearings attached to the table underneath the top thereof in such a manner that the saw operated and revolved in a narrow opening in and through the top of the table, a distance of 7 or 8 inches from the end of the table. That 2 or 3 inches of the saw were above the top of the table, and the balance of the saw, or 8 or 9 inches, was below the top of the table. That at the end of the table where the saw was in operation and underneath the saw and top of the table was a waste chute used to carry off the tailings or waste matter, which chute was about 2 feet square at the top and tapered to 12 or 14 inches at the bottom. That the bottom of the chute went through the floor of the mill into a conveyor, which conveyor carried the tailings and waste material, which fell into the chute, outside of the mill. The chute in which appellant was injured was about two feet square and directly underneath the saw and extended out from the end of the table and saw about 22 inches, and under the saw it was close to the inner side of the chute, the saw blade being from one to two inches from the inner side of the chute. That the greater part of the chute was from the saw to the outer edge of the chute. The whole saw, frame and all, weighed about 350 pounds. That the saw was operated by means of revolving belts which transmitted the power from revolving shafts to the axle on which the saw was attached. That the saw...
To continue reading
Request your trial