Middlebrooks v. Atlanta Metallic Casket Co
| Decision Date | 16 November 1940 |
| Docket Number | No. 28550.,28550. |
| Citation | 11 S.E.2d 682 |
| Parties | MIDDLEBROOKS. v. ATLANTA METALLIC CASKET CO. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. A master must warn a servant of the conditions under which he is employed which are liable to engender disease, and must furnish suitable protection from such danger, provided that the master is in a position to have greater knowledge of the danger than the servant.
2. While the master is chargeable with knowledge of the fact that fumes or dust, given off by the various substances used in industrial processes, are poisonous to persons who inhale them and may engender in his servant lead poisoning, a disease, the servant, in the absence of a warning by the master, will not be presumed to have knowledge thereof.
3. A servant in a metallic casket manufacturing business, the material from whichthe caskets are made being covered-and coated with lead, will not be held as a matter of law to have known that the inhalation by one of fumes, dust and particles of lead would likely engender or produce in the person inhaling them lead poisoning, an incurable disease, so as to be charged with assumption of the risk.
Error from Superior Court, Fulton County; A. L. Etheridge, Judge.
Suit by Leonard Middlebrooks against the Atlanta Metallic Casket Company, to recover damages for lead poisoning sustained by the plaintiff while in the employ of the defendant. To review as adverse judgment, the plaintiff brings error.
Judgment reversed.
Leonard Middlebrooks brought suit for damages against the Atlanta Metallic Casket Company. In the petition it is alleged that prior to May 10, 1935, he was a strong able-bodied man and in excellent health; that the defendant, during all times mentioned in the petition, and for many years prior thereto, was engaged in the business of manufacturing caskets; that the material from which these caskets were made was covered and coated with lead; that the joints and corners thereof were leaded and soldered together; that a grinding or emery disc was used to cut down the leaded and soldered joints of the caskets to make them smooth and even; that on or about April 1935, he was employed by the defendant to run and operate a grinding or emery disc for the purpose of cutting down the joints and corners of caskets under construction; that said machine, when brought into contact with the soldered or leaded surface, threw into the air great quantities of lead and solder particles and created a veritable dust of lead particles in the air; that he was and is uneducated and was ignorant of the dangers incident to breathing lead dust, and was ignorant of the dangers incident to swallowing the same, and of absorbing the same through his lungs, stomach, nose, mouth, eyes and ears; that the defendant did know of the dangers to the petitioner of lead poisoning from inhaling, swallowing and absorbing lead particles or in the exercise of ordinary care should have known of said danger; that the defendant did not warn petitioner of the danger incident to breathing, inhaling, swallowing and absorbing lead particles and dust, nor did it warn the petitioner of the dangers of lead poisoning, although it knew the danger which petitioner would incur in operating the grinding and buffing machine; that the defendant negligently failed to furnish the petitioner any mask or guard for his nose and mouth to protect him from inhaling or swallowing lead dust and lead particles; that the defendant negligently failed to furnish the petitioner any suction device for filtering or carrying away the lead dust and particles; that the defendant negligently failed to furnish the petitioner any method for the circulation of air or to prevent the congestion of lead dust in said room; that the place where the petitioner was assigned to work and to run and operate the grinding and buffing machine was poorly ventilated, for that there were only a few small windows furnishing poor ventilation, and no method provided for pumping in fresh air and pumping out foul air, polluted with lead dust; that the defendant negligently failed and refused to furnish the petitioner a safe place in which to work; that none of the above precautionary measures were available to the petitioner and none were furnished by anyone acting for the defendant, and none were furnished at the place at which the petitioner was working at any time while he was so working for the defendant and the defendant knew such measures were necessary in order to prevent him from contracting lead poisoning; that no device or equipment of any kind was furnished by the defendant to the petitioner at the place where petitioner worked such as would reduce the amount of dust or make the place safe for the petitioner; that no warning was given the petitioner of the danger of lead dust and of his employment; that no rules were promulgated by the defendant and brought to the attention of the petitioner so as to protect him from the danger of such work, and said lead dust; that the defendant well knew, during all the time that the petitioner worked for it, of the dangers of lead poisoning; that the officers, agents and supervisors of the defendant, during all the time the petitioner was employed, well knew of the danger to the petitioner of said lead dust and of the danger of lead poisoning to the petitioner; that the petitioner did not know of the danger of his employment or of the danger of contracting lead poisoning; that the defendant well knowing the danger thereof and the necessity of furnishing proper equipment, ventilation, masks, guards, safe guards and rules, placed the petitioner insaid employment in such manner as to render it probable that he would contract the disease of lead poisoning and the defendant well knew of such probability; that the petitioner worked on said grinding and buffing machine from about April, 1935, until about February 23, 1936, when he was advised by competent medical experts that he had contracted lead poisoning; that from April, 1935, until May 10, 1935, the petitioner had swallowed and absorbed so little of said lead dust that he had not contracted lead poisoning on May 10, 1935, but on said date was well and strong and in good health; that from May 10, 1935, to February 23, 1936, your petitioner during working hours did inhale, swallow, and absorb lead dust; that between said dates the petitioner continuously breathed, swallowed, inhaled, and absorbed, during working hours, lead dust and lead particles which were the direct and proximate cause of his contracting the disease of lead poisoning; that lead poisoning is a cumulative poison; that between the dates of May 10, 1935, and February 23, 1936, the lead poisoning in the petitioner's system daily became greater by reason of additional amounts of lead dust being daily absorbed during working hours; that the petitioner sues for the poisoning of his system occasioned by the inhaling, swallowing, and absorbing lead dust between the dates of May 10, 1935, and February 23, 1936; that the lead poisoning permeated the blood stream of the petitioner, and every vital organ of petitioner's body was poisoned, depleted, and impaired; that this disease is agonizingly painful and has caused the petitioner great suffering, both mental and physical; that lead poisoning is incurable and will cause the premature death of the petitioner; and that the illness and disease herein referred to as lead poisoning is and was the sole, direct, and proximate result of the negligence of the defendant.
The petitioner amended his petition and alleged that had the defendant made a scientific investigation it could have easily ascertained that a person might contract lead poisoning from inhaling, swallowing or absorbing lead particles; that had the defendant furnished the petitioner a mask or guard for his nose or mouth to protect him from inhaling or swallowing lead particles, he would not have contracted lead poisoning as alleged, and that had the defendant furnished a suction device for filtering or carrying away said lead dust or lead particles, or had otherwise filtered the air before it reached the petitioner's lungs, he would not have contracted lead poisoning as alleged. The court sustained the general demurrer to the petition as amended, and to this ruling the plaintiff excepted.
Clint W. Hager and J. F. Kemp, both of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
Hirsch, Smith & Kilpatrick, and E. D. Smith, Jr., all of Atlanta, for defendant in error.
STEPHENS, Presiding Judge (after stating the foregoing facts).
A master must use reasonable care...
To continue reading
Request your trial