Louisville & N.R. Co. v. McCoy

Decision Date16 November 1937
Citation270 Ky. 603,110 S.W.2d 433
PartiesLOUISVILLE & N. R. CO. v. McCOY.
CourtKentucky Court of Appeals

Appeal from Circuit Court, Bell County.

Action by Pinquard M. McCoy against the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company. From a judgment in favor of the plaintiff the defendant appeals.

Reversed.

Ashby M. Warren, of Louisville, and Low & Bryant, of Pineville, for appellant.

Golden & Lay, of Pineville, for appellee.

STANLEY Commissioner.

A judgment for $7,222 in favor of appellee, Pinquard M. McCoy against the appellant for damages to his health allegedly caused by the inhalation of carbon monoxide gas, was reversed for errors relating to the admission and rejection of evidence. All other questions were expressly reserved. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company v. McCoy, 261 Ky. 435, 87 S.W.2d 921. Upon a second trial McCoy recovered judgment for $6,000, and the railroad company again appeals.

McCoy had been an engineer and fireman. Because of falling off in work and his juniority in the service he had been demoted for the time being to a hostler in the yards at Wallsend, near Pineville. A hostler is one who takes charge of a locomotive after a trip. There were three such employees in this yard of equal rank, each working on an eight-hour shift or trick and each having a helper. McCoy's trick began at 10:30 p. m. and Abe Hoskins was his assistant. He had been on this particular job six or eight nights, but had been familiar with the conditions for fifteen years. It was the duty of the hostler to inspect the locomotive in a general way for leaks, loose parts, or other defects; have it supplied with grease, sand, water, etc.; shake down the fire and ashes; and make such minor repairs as were needed and could be done without sending the engine to the roundhouse. For the purpose of cleaning out the ashpit and of permitting the workmen to get under the engine to make the repairs, there is maintained a pit between the rails. It is about 25 feet long, 3 1/2 feet wide, and 3 1/2 to 4 1/2 feet deep. It appears that the adjacent track on one side is perhaps 2 feet higher, and because on this occasion there was a large quantity of cinders piled upon the other side, so it is claimed, the ventilation in the pit was insufficient when an engine was over it. Those conditions and the presence of smoldering cinders in the pit generating carbon monoxide gas form the basis of the allegation of negligence on the part of the railroad company in not furnishing the plaintiff a safe place in which to work.

At 9:55 p. m. Engineer Nelson brought in an engine and filed what is designated as a "work report," which is required to be made showing what repairs or special attention, if any, are needed to the engine. This was while another hostler, James Woods, was on duty. McCoy testified that he came to his place of work about ten minutes early and met Nelson leaving. The latter told him to look at his report and if he hadn't put on it that the brakes should be tightened for him to put it on for him, and requested that McCoy tighten the brakes as the engine might be needed next morning. Nelson denied having seen McCoy that night, and stated there was nothing wrong with the brakes. Woods testified that he and Nelson inspected the engine and then he and Hoskins took it to the sand track, supplied it with sand, and brought it over the pit where it was when McCoy came on duty. McCoy testified that the engine was over the pit when he came, but that he never saw Woods or anybody else who had worked with him. He looked for Nelson's report but didn't find it. However, he had stated on the first trial that he had seen that report, and also in his deposition taken as on cross-examination that he had seen it and that he had to adjust the brakes. The report produced on the trial referred only to the need for an adjustment of the lubricator. By the time he looked over the reports, got his tools ready, and went to work on the brakes, McCoy testified perhaps an hour and a half had elapsed. While he was under the engine he learned for the first time of his helper's presence by hearing him on the engine putting water in it. When he went off duty that night, Woods testified, Abe Hoskins, McCoy's helper, was at work on the engine, but whether he was then getting ready to "knock the fire" or had already done so he could not say. He saw McCoy there near the pit.

On this occasion Abe Hoskins, for accommodation, had relieved his brother, George, who was Woods' helper, a half hour earlier, or about 10 o'clock, which accounts for his helping Woods. He testified that he had "knocked the fire out" and wet the cinders down while Woods was on duty. McCoy related that he had backed down into the pit between the pilot and the front driving wheels. He had a torch and the pit was dark except where he was. It was about 20 feet to the back end. There was no ventilation except between the engine wheels. While working strenuously he began to choke and smother and called to Hoskins for aid. He was breathing like his throat was closed and feeling like a lot of needles were being run into his throat and legs. With Hoskins' assistance he crawled out from under the engine and then became unconscious until 4 o'clock in the morning. When he revived he was lying down in the hostler's house. He drank some coffee and got into the air and then felt better, although his head was throbbing, vision blurred, and he had a drumming sensation in his ears. He then learned for the first time that there were cinders in the back of the pit which had been wet down but were still hot in the center of the pile. He started in helping Hoskins shovel out the cinders, but the odor was so strong he couldn't stand it and soon commenced sinking down. He went home and remained in bed two or three days. The unchallenged records, however, show that he worked as a hostler the next night, and then was put back as a fireman, in which job he served a number of days during the following month. McCoy was finally let out of service in the following June on account of the necessary reduction of forces.

Hoskins testified McCoy was overcome after the engine had been moved off and while they were shoveling the cinders and coals out of the pit.

The evidence tending to show negligence of the defendant in not furnishing the plaintiff a safe place in which to work is limited to his testimony that if a hostler did not have time to clear the pit of cinders it was his duty to notify his successor on the job that the fire and cinders had been left in it; that Woods left the smoldering coals without notifying him; and that he went to work without any knowledge of their presence. It is further argued as we have indicated, that the elevated track on one side and a large pile of cinders on the other obstructed the ventilation under the engine.

We pass over the very doubtful point that the defendant was guilty of negligence, and may observe also that the overwhelming weight of the evidence is that the plaintiff's anemic condition is not due to his having encountered carbon monoxide or other permanently injurious gas on this occasion. It seems to us to be quite clear that, whatever unsafe condition there might have been, the plaintiff assumed the risk incident thereto.

The case comes under the Federal...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Stephenson v. Csx Transportation, Inc., 2002-CA-001796-MR.
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • September 12, 2003
    ...decisions of the federal courts construing the statute as to "substantive" legal issues. See, e.g., Louisville & N.R. Co. v. McCoy, 270 Ky. 603, 110 S.W.2d 433, 435 (1937); St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. v. Dickerson, 470 U.S. 409, 411, 105 S.Ct. 1347, 1348, 84 L.Ed.2d 303 (1985); Morant v.......
  • Tucker's Adm'R v. Louisville & N.R. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • April 18, 1939
    ...and continued to work with knowledge of the conditions complained of, they assumed the risk. In Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company v. McCoy, 270 Ky. 603, 110 S.W. (2d) 433, 435, McCoy was a hostler employed by the railroad company and sued to recover for injuries resulting from being o......
  • Union Central Life Ins. Co. v. Shelman
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • November 16, 1937
    ... ...          Affirmed ...          William ... E. Berry, of Louisville, for appellant ...          Walls & ... Kincheloe and Allen R. Kincheloe, all of ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT