Lynn v. Glucose Sugar Ref. Co.
| Decision Date | 22 September 1905 |
| Citation | 128 Iowa 501,104 N.W. 577 |
| Parties | LYNN v. GLUCOSE SUGAR REFINING CO. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from District Court, Marshall County; G. W. Burnham, Judge.
Action to recover damages for injuries received by plaintiff while in defendant's employ, resulting, as alleged, from defendant's negligence. At the close of plaintiff's evidence the court, on motion of defendant, directed a verdict in its favor, and the plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.T. F. Bradford, for appellant.
Binford, Snelling & Farber, for appellee.
Plaintiff at the time of the injury was acting as one of the firemen in the boiler room of defendant's factory at Marshalltown, and while thus employed he received an injury in one eye which destroyed its sight. The evidence tends to show that this injury was occasioned by the flying into the eye of a bit of steel and some particles of coal, occasioned by the act of a fellow workman in breaking lump coal with a steel sledge or hammer. There is no evidence that the flying of the particles of coal was due to any negligence chargeable to the defendant, but the evidence tended to show that the bit of steel which inflicted the most serious injury, and probably occasioned the loss of the sight of plaintiff's eye, slivered off from the steel hammer, which was made from a piece of soft steel shafting; that sledges or hammers of this kind were provided for the use of the workmen by defendant's superintendent or foreman; and that if, instead of this kind of sledge or hammer, defendant had furnished its workmen with hammers or picks made of tool steel and properly tempered, there would have been less danger that particles would sliver off and fly to the peril of the workmen. It was also alleged, and there was evidence tending to prove, that the sledges or hammers, as above described, in use by defendant's employés in breaking coal, had become battered and worn, and had remained in that condition for such length of time that defendant was chargeable in the exercise of ordinary care with knowledge thereof. There is no evidence, however, that the battered and worn condition of the hammers or sledges rendered them any more dangerous in respect to the flying off of slivers of steel than they were when first constructed; and the only evidence of the slivering of the particular hammer, from the use of which the accident is claimed to have resulted, indicated that a bit of steel flew out of the end of the hammer, leaving a fresh break or surface. The only ground of negligence, then, on which plaintiff could rely, was the furnishing by defendant to its workmen of sledges...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Laurel Mills v. Ward
... ... Minetto Shade Cloth Co., 134 A.D. 28, ... 117 N.Y.S. 1081; Lynn v. Glucose Sugar Ref. Co., 128 ... Iowa 501, 104 N.W. 577; Cregan v ... ...
-
Ohio Valley Ry. Co. v. Copley
... ... safety. Lynn v. Glucose Sugar Refining Co., 128 Iowa ... 501, 104 N.W. 577. Many cases ... See ... Lynn v. Glucose Sugar Ref. Co., 128 Iowa 501, 104 ... N.W. 577 (hammer); Atchison, T. & S. F. R ... ...
-
Wausau Southern Lumber Co. v. Cooley
...in simple tools which can be readily detected and repaired." The same thing practically was held in the case of Lynn v. Glucose Sugar Refining Company, 104 N.W. 577. we admit that there are authorities holding contrary to these cases, yet we insist that the master ought not to be liable for......
-
Anderson v. Moser, 34638
...are of a simple nature, easily understood, and in which defects can be readily observed by such servant.' Lynn v. Glucose Sugar Refining Co., 128 Iowa 501, 104 N.W. 577, 578, a case cited as an authority in Vanderpool v. Partridge, supra, considered this situation: Plaintiff was a fireman a......