Pellerin v. Int'l Paper Co.

• Decision Date: 15 April 1902
• Citation: 52 A. 842,96 Me. 388
• Parties: PELLERIN v. INTERNATIONAL PAPER CO.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

52 A. 842

96 Me. 388

PELLERIN

v. INTERNATIONAL PAPER CO.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

April 15, 1902.

(Official.)

Action by Philip Pellerin against the International Paper Company. Plaintiff recovered a verdict of $431.59, and defendant moved for a new trial. New trial granted.

Argued before WISWELL, C. J., and EMERY, WHITEHOUSE, STROUT, PEABODY, and SPEAR, JJ.

D. J. McGillicuddy and P. A. Morey, for plaintiff.

Geo. D. Bisbee and Ralph T. Parker, for defendant.

WHITEHOUSE, J. In this action the plaintiff seeks to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by reason of the fall of a staging upon which he was at work for the defendant company. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff of $431.59, and the defendant asks the court to set it aside as against law and evidence.

The plaintiff introduced testimony tending to establish the following facts: The plaintiff was employed in painting the ceiling of a room in the defendant's pulp mill, and at the time of the accident was standing or sitting with three other workmen upon a staging suspended about fire feet below the ceiling by six iron rods, or painters' hooks, attached to the ceiling. The staging was about 20 feet long and 10 feet wide, with three of the depending iron rods on each side. The lower ends of these rods were bent in the form of rectangular hooks or loops, into which were placed edgewise three planks, 2 inches thick, to serve as stringers or floor timbers. Upon these stringers were laid the planks constituting the stage upon which the workmen were seated while engaged in painting, but, as these planks were only about 11 or 12 feet long, it required two of them to reach the entire length of the stage; the ends lapping over on the middle stringer. Thus constructed, the staging could be readily taken apart and removed, or set up in another part of the room, as necessity or convenience might require in the progress of the work.

The defendant company furnished the iron rods and the planks to be used in the erection of such stagings, and when not in use they were stored with like materials in the company's storehouse. The plaintiff's fellow workmen brought the rods and planks from the storehouse for the erection of the staging in question, and, although the plaintiff himself took no part in the selection of the materials, he bad several times assisted in moving the staging, by taking it down and putting it up again. At the time of the accident the plaintiff was engaged in painting with a fellow workman at one end of the stage, when the two workmen at the other end, having finished painting there, went over to that part of the stage where the plaintiff sat. Thereupon two of the iron rods broke,— one at the inner angle of the hook and the other at the outer angle,—and the stage fell and caused the injuries to the plaintiff of which he complains. There was evidence tending to show that the planks placed edgewise in the rectangular Iron hooks filled only about five-eighths of the space between the rods of some of the hooks, and were not secured in a vertical position, but allowed to incline outward, as shown by the following diagram:

The defendant Introduced no evidence, contending that the plaintiff had failed to show any actionable negligence on the part of the company.

It is the opinion of the court that this contention on the part of the defense was justified by the evidence, and that a nonsuit might properly have been ordered...