Murphy v. Great Northern Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 15 June 1897
• Docket Number: Nos. 10,616 - (229).,s. 10,616 - (229).
• Citation: 68 Minn. 526
• Parties: JAMES MURPHY v. GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL>
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

Page 526

68 Minn. 526

JAMES MURPHY v. GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY.¹

Nos. 10,616 - (229).

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

June 15, 1897.

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Bunn, J., after a verdict for defendant, denying a new trial. Affirmed.

C. D. &. T. D. O'Brien, for appellant.

C. Wellington, for respondent.

BUCK, J.

The plaintiff, 28 years old, was a laborer in the employ of the defendant company in its general yards in the city of St. Paul, in which capacity he had been engaged from April, 1896, to August 20th of the same year, on which last-named day he, with other laborers, were called by one of defendant's foremen to move a transfer table. This machine consisted of a heavy wood and iron frame, movable upon wheels, which ran upon rails sunk in a pit two or three feet deep, and over 300 feet long. This machine was usually moved by compressed air, but sometimes by cranks and by hand, and used for the purpose of moving heavy material from the shops to the tracks in the yard. Certain braces or guys extended from and connected with the sides of this transfer table, and when moving it by hand some of the men usually stood within the angles formed by these braces, and pushed the table by hand, or, when their hands got tired, the men turned their backs, and pushed the table with their shoulders.

On the day of the accident, August 20, 1896, plaintiff was required to go down into this pit with his fellow laborers, and push the transfer table. While doing so, his arms became tired, and he turned his back, and commenced pushing the table with his shoulders, standing in the meantime within the angle formed by one of the braces. As he thus pushed the table, his right foot came in contact with a block or piece of timber lying alongside of the rail. This block was 2 feet 10 inches long, 8 1-2 inches wide, and 4 1-2 inches thick, and as plaintiff's foot came in contact with the block it struck his heel, forced his leg up into an angle of the brace, and crushed his leg, so injuring it that it is one inch shorter than before; and up to the time of the trial he had not been able to work, and to some extent he was permanently crippled. The case was tried to a jury, and when the testimony was closed the court, upon motion of defendant, directed the jury to find a verdict in favor of the defendant, which was done accordingly. A motion for a new trial was denied, and plaintiff appealed.

It is not claimed by the appellant, nor does the evidence show, that there was any defect in the original construction of the transfer table. It was a large, ponderous machine, suitable and complete for the purpose for which it was constructed and used, and the injury was the result of this obstruction, which by some means had fallen or been placed along the side of one of the rails upon which the machine was moved. It formed no part of the machine itself, and the record does not disclose the fact that it was used as a convenient or necessary adjunct in operating the machine. Nor do we find any evidence that the machinery was being operated or moved in a careless or negligent manner. There were as we have already stated, three ways by which the table might be moved. It does not appear that any one of these ways was more dangerous than the other. This transfer table was not loaded at the time of the accident, and in such case, and when it was not operated by air or by the crank, if the laborers were in a hurry, then ...