McCormick Harvesting Mach. Co. v. Liter

• Decision Date: 19 February 1902
• Citation: 66 S.W. 761
• Parties: McCORMICK HARVESTING MACH. CO. v. LITER. [1]
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

66 S.W. 761

McCORMICK HARVESTING MACH. CO. v. LITER. ^[1]

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

February 19, 1902

Appeal from circuit court, Jefferson county.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by Albert Liter against the McCormick Harvesting Machine Company to recover damages for personal injuries. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed.

A. M Rutledge and Kohn, Baird & Spindle, for appellant.

Dodd &amp Dodd and W. M. Smith, for appellee.

PAYNTER J.

About the 1st of November, 1898, A. Hunter Mason made a purchase conditionally from appellant of a corn-shredding machine. Under the contract the appellant was to set up the machine upon Mason's farm and give it a practical test with the corn on his place. If it operated to Mason's satisfaction, he was to accept it and pay for it; if not, it was to be taken back by appellant. It was delivered at Mason's farm on November 5, 1898. On November 7th the appellant sent A. T. Wright, one of its employés, to set it up and make the trial test. On the 8th of November, Wright began to operate the machine, and did so for three days. When Wright left, Mason's employés took charge of the machine and operated it until December 8, 1898. In the meantime a ratchet got out of repair, when Wright returned and supplied a new one. This was on November 23, 1898. During the three days which Wright operated the machine, the appellee, Liter was band cutter, and at times helped Wright feed the machine. Before Wright left, he showed the appellee how to feed it. It was somewhat of the same character as a threshing machine. The feeder stood upon a slightly-raised platform at the end of the feeding table. The shredder had what are known as the "snapping rolls." They revolved inwardly, drawing the cornstalks into a set of revolving knives which were immediately back of the snapping rolls, which shredded the stalks and blades. The stalks were fed by first giving their butt ends to the snapping rolls, and as they were drawn in the ears of corn were snapped off and dropped into an opening made in front of the rolls, where they were shucked. From the platform where the feeder stood to the top of the feed table was three feet and one inch. The feed table rested upon a framework. At the outer end of it, where the feeder stood was three feet and nine inches from the snapping rolls, but it could be made three inches shorter when desired; but at the time the accident occurred the outer end was three feet and nine inches from the snapping rolls. Wright was five feet and eight inches high, so his body stood two feet seven inches above the top of the feed table, when standing in front of and against it. The corn was cut and put in bundles, which were secured by bands. It was hauled and placed on the table, where the bands were cut. It was then passed to the feeder. After Wright had tested the machine for three days, a man by the name of McDowell took his place as feeder, who fed it until about the 23d of November, when Mason's foreman employed the appellee, Liter, to do it. Liter had been band cutter and worked near the front of the machine from the time it was placed on Mason's farm until the 23d of November, when he assured Mason's foreman that he could feed the machine. He received $1 a day as band cutter, but was paid $1.50 per day for feeding the machine. He had fed the machine some during the time when McDowell was there. There was attached to the shredder a lever which by some mechanical appliance could stop the snapping rolls. The lever was brought around in front of the feed table, so that the feeder, by the pressure of his body against it, could manipulate it. Two purposes were to be accomplished by the lever: It was to stop the rolls so as to unchoke the machine when necessary, and at the same time operated as a safety appliance. About the 23d of November, Wright discovering that the ratchet which was manipulated by the lever was being worn out by use, and thus prevented the successful operation of the machine, he tied the lever so as to prevent its use for either of the purposes stated. Liter knew of this fact; being present when the lever was thus tied, and well knowing the purpose for which it was done. The snapping rolls can be seen by the feeder, as can the teeth of the cylinder of a threshing machine. On the 8th of December, while Liter was feeding the machine, his left hand was caught between the snapping rolls, and his arm was so mangled that amputation was necessary. This action was brought to recover damages for the loss of his arm and for the mental and physical suffering which he endured. In describing how the accident happened, he said: "I was snatched in. A stalk of corn caught my glove and snatched me in." He says that Wright told him that there was no danger in operating the machine with the safety lever tied up, and that he continued to feed it "because he told me I could not get in it. He says a man was too far away,--he could not get in it."

A master is not required to furnish machinery with the latest improvements. It is the duty of the master to provide reasonably safe machinery for the use of his employés, and to keep it in reasonably safe repair. The appellee was 27 years of age. He knew the exact...