Reitman v. Bangart

• Decision Date: 02 April 1901
• Citation: 59 N.E. 1080,26 Ind.App. 468
• Parties: REITMAN et al. v. BANGART.
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

26 Ind.App. 468

59 N.E. 1080

REITMAN et al.

v.BANGART.

Appellate Court of Indiana.

April 2, 1901.

Appeal from superior court, Vanderburgh county; John H. Foster, Judge.

Action for injuries by Benjamin H. Bangart against Henry H. Reitman and others. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendants appeal. Reversed.

Chas. L. Wedding, for appellants. Posey & Chappell, for appellee.

COMSTOCK, J.

Appellee, by his next friend, brought this action against appellants to recover damages for personal injuries claimed to have been sustained by him while in the employ of appellants. A trial resulted in a judgment in favor of appellee for $3,500.

The first specification of the assignment of errors questions the sufficiency of the complaint; the second, the action of the court in overruling appellants' motion for a new trial. The objections urged to the complaint are that it has no settled or definite theory, and does not state facts upon which a cause of action can be predicated. The complaint is short. Omitting the names of the parties, we give it in full, as follows: “That the plaintiff is an infant under the age of twenty-one years (21), and under the age of fifteen years. That on the 3d day of February, 1899, the said Benjamin H. Bangart was employed by said defendants in a planing mill owned and operated by the said defendants. That on said 3d day of February, 1899, the said Benjamin H. Bangart was performing the duties of off-bearer on a certain machine owned and operated by the said defendants, and commonly known as the ‘sticker.’ That, as a part of the duties of the said Benjamin H. Bangart as said off-bearer, he was instructed to press and to hold down certain pieces of wood which were being run through the said machine. That while obeying said orders, and while holding down certain pieces of wood the said plaintiff, Benjamin H. Bangart, without any negligence whatever on his part, had his hand caught in the bits of said machine, and the same badly torn and lacerated, and all of his fingers on said hand and a part of the palm of said hand were torn away, thereby rendering said Benjamin H. Bangart a cripple for life, which said injury was caused solely by the defective machinery aforesaid. That the defendants knowingly and negligently allowed the said machine to become unsafe and to remain out of repair in this, to wit: that there was no guard whatever around and over the said knives and bits of said machine to protect the hands of the employés and operators from being caught and mangled in said machine; that there were no rollers on said machine to hold the said pieces of wood in the proper position, but the same had to be held down by hand, so that they would pass through said machine and over the said bits in the proper manner. That said defendants were negligent in suffering said machine to become out of repair, and in allowing this plaintiff, who is a child of the age of fifteen years, and inexperienced in the use and operation of such machines, as defendants well knew, to work about and off-bear the said machine; and said plaintiff had no knowledge that said machine was defective or that guards were necessary, because of his youth and inexperience. That prior to the 3d day of February, 1899, the said plaintiff was employed by the said defendants to wheel blocks and shavings from said shop and mill, and had never...