Norwood v. St. Louis-San Francisco. Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 01 September 1925
• Docket Number: No. 3814.,3814.
• Citation: 277 S.W. 936
• Parties: NORWOOD v. ST. LOUIS-SAN FRANCISCO. RY CO.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

277 S.W. 936

NORWOOD v. ST. LOUIS-SAN FRANCISCO. RY CO.

No. 3814.

Springfield Court of Appeals. Missouri.

September 1, 1925.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Douglass County; Hon. Fred Stewart, Judge.

Action by Elmer Norwood against the St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

W. F. Evans, of St. Louis, and John H. Lucas and William 0. Lucas, both of Kansas City, for appellant.

Seth Conrad, of Marshfield, and C. H. Skinker, Jr., and Hamlin, Hamlin & Hamlin, all of Springfield, for respondent.

COX, P. J.

Action for damages for personal injury. Plaintiff recovered $2,500, and defendant appealed.

The only question we deem it necessary to consider is whether under the pleadings and evidence the case should have been submitted to the jury. The petition alleged that plaintiff was in the employ of defendant at Newburg and engaged in repairing freight cars; that said cars had at either end an equipment known as a drawhead or bar; that the drawhead or bar in question was about 4 or 5 feet in length, about 18 inches in width where the coupling is made, and about 10 inches wide at the other end, and weighed about 250 or 300 lbs.; that it was attached to the car under the floor about the center from either side, and was held in place by casings or iron supports, and on either side of said drawhead were iron supports called lugs; that in removing the drawhead from the car the workmen had been instructed, and it had long been the usual practice, to loosen the bolts and rivets, etc., holding the drawhead in place, then shove the drawhead back and forth until it was thoroughly loosened, when it would fall of its own weight to the ground in the center of the track; that on January 21, 1924, plaintiff and other workmen were ordered to repair a certain yoke rivet underneath a freight car; that, in order to do so, it was necessary to remove the drawhead; that they proceeded in the usual way and tried to remove the drawhead; that they loosened all the bolts and bars and manipulated the drawhead with their hands in the usual way, but it failed to fall. Plaintiff then stepped to the north side of the track, whereupon another workman on the south side who knew, or by ordinary care could have known, that the lug on the north side of the drawbar was broken and had fallen over onto the drawbar and was holding it, and so seeing, said servant and employee placed a claw bar under the drawbar near where said...