Patterson v. Alabama Fuel & Iron Co.

Decision Date21 October 1915
Docket Number944
Citation194 Ala. 278,69 So. 952
PartiesPATTERSON v. ALABAMA FUEL & IRON CO.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Rehearing Denied Nov. 18, 1915

Appeal from City Court of Birmingham; John H. Miller, Judge.

Action by Nettie Patterson, as administratrix, against the Alabama Fuel & Iron Company, for damages for the death of her intestate. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Plaintiff's intestate was an employé of one Richardson, who had contracted with defendant company to drive a certain heading and an air course in defendant's mine. The mine consisted of a main slope, and the usual air course running parallel with it, and separated by a wall of some feet in thickness. Richardson's heading left the main slope at right angles pierced the main air course, and continued for 100 feet or more with a parallel air course of its own. The main air course is excavated and used solely for the circulation of air, and as a conduit for the electric cable which ran along its floor and supplied the power for the mine. Its surface was unfinished and rough, and it was only about 4 1/2 feet in height. At the point where it was pierced and crossed by the heading, the cable was raised and supported by a post on each side and carried over along the roof of the heading, which was a little over 5 feet high, and 5 or 6 feet wide. After leaving these posts, the cable dropped to the floor of the air course again. The intestate had been working near the face of the heading and was seen to hurry back towards its entrance, and in a few minutes was heard to cry out and those near by hurried to him, and found him lying on the floor of the main air course at a distance estimated at from 4 or 5 or 10 or 15 feet below the lower rib or side of the heading grasping the cable in one hand. He died shortly afterwards and it was found that the cable was spliced at the place at which intestate was killed, and that the splice was partly bare of insulation. No one saw intestate enter the air course, and no explanation is afforded by the evidence as to why he did so, except as may be inferred from the fact that his supply of blasting powder was afterwards found in the air course about 10 or 12 feet below the point where he was killed. The powder used by Richardson and his workmen for this heading was regularly kept in a powder box some distance up the main slope. It appears that these workmen often kept their dinner buckets at the corner post where the heading intersected with the main air course, and ate their dinner there, and waited there when shots were fired in the heading but they never went into the air course for any purpose, and they had no duties requiring them to enter.

The complaint is in several counts, but it is only necessary to set out the gravamen of counts 3 and 5; which are as follows:

(3) That defendant was operating a coal mine in Shelby county, and plaintiff's intestate was in said mine by invitation of defendant, but not as an employé of defendant, and while therein, as aforesaid, came in contact with a wire charged with more than 480 volts of electricity, alternating current, which said wire was not adequately insulated to minimize the danger of shock, and as a proximate consequence thereof, so shocked by said electric current was plaintiff's intestate that he died. Plaintiff alleges that all her damages and the death of her said intestate were proximately caused by reason of defendant using said wires so charged with electricity in said mine, without having been adequately insulated to minimize the danger of shock.

(5) Same as 3 except that it is alleged that plaintiff's injuries and damages and the death of her said intestate was proximately caused by reason of the negligence of defendant in negligently failing to have and maintain said mine in a reasonably safe condition on the occasion aforesaid.

The plea was the general issue with leave to give in evidence any matter of special defense. At the end of the trial the court gave the general affirmative charge for defendant at its request.

Allen & Bell, of Birmingham, for appellant.

Percy, Benners & Burr and Thos. W. Palmer, Jr., all of Birmingham, for appellee.

SOMERVILLE J.

The principles of law which fix the liability of the owner of premises for injuries suffered thereon by one who was there by the invitation of the owner are well settled by numerous authorities.

When a mineowner invites a second person to assist in driving an entry and mining coal therein, and the latter is injured by reason of a dangerous condition existing at any place in the mine, to support a recovery against the owner therefor: (1) The circumstances must be such as to justify the inference that the second person had a legal right, derived from the owner, to occupy the place where his injury occurred; and (2) it must be apparent to the owner, considered as a man of ordinary powers of observation, that the position likely to be assumed by the second person in the exercise of the right so acquired with respect to the owner himself or some physical agency which was under his control at the time, is such that the second person...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Alabama Power Co. v. Berry
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • October 12, 1950
    ...for a recovery that it be proven. Stowers v. Dwight Mfg. Co., 202 Ala. 252, 253, 254, 80 So. 90, 91; Patterson v. Alabama Fuel & Iron Co., 194 Ala. 278, 284, 285, 69 So. 952, 954; Tobler v. Pioneer Mining & Mfg. Co., 166 Ala. 482, 515, 518, 52 So. 86, 97; Alexander v. Woodmen of the World, ......
  • Standard Cooperage Co. v. Dearman
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • October 21, 1920
    ... ... 436; T.C.I. & R. Co. v. Moore, 194 Ala. 134, 69 ... So. 540; Patterson v. Ala. F. & I. Co., 194 Ala ... 278, 282, 69 So. 952; South Brilliant ... plank as a part of its plant. Woodward Iron Co. v ... Wade, 192 Ala. 651, 658, 68 So. 1008; Tobler v. Pioneer ... ...
  • State v. Alabama Public Service Commission
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • January 16, 1975
    ...of a court whether to admit further evidence after the testimony has been closed. James v. Tait, 8 Port. 476; Patterson v. Alabama Fuel & Iron Co., 194 Ala. 278, 69 So. 952; Atlanta Life Ins. Co. v. Ash, 228 Ala. 184, 153 So. 261; Bundy v. Echols, 239 Ala. 421, 195 So. To have reopened the ......
  • Reed v. Ridout's Ambulance, Inc.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • January 22, 1925
    ... ... RIDOUT'S AMBULANCE, Inc. 6 Div. 43 Supreme Court of Alabama January 22, 1925 ... Appeal ... from Circuit Court, Jefferson ... verdict as directed. Patterson v. Ala. F. & I. Co., ... 194 Ala. 278, 69 So. 952 ... The ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT