S. Drilling Co. v. Mckee

• Decision Date: 05 March 1935
• Docket Number: Case Number: 22783
• Citation: 171 Okla. 409,42 P.2d 265,1935 OK 222
• Parties: SOUTHERN DRILLING CO. v. McKEE, Adm'x
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

1935 OK 222

42 P.2d 265

171 Okla. 409

SOUTHERN DRILLING CO. v. McKEE, Adm'x

Case Number: 22783

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided: March 5, 1935

Syllabus

¶0 1. Master and Servant - Nondelegable Duties of Master.

It is the duty of a master to furnish a servant with a reasonably safe place in which to work, reasonably safe appliances with which to work, reasonably safe material with which to work, and a reasonably safe method by which to work, which duties the master cannot delegate so as to relieve himself of liability from injuries resulting from their violation.

2. Same - Action Against Master and Servant Jointly - Verdict Against the Master Alone.

In a joint suit against a master and a servant charging, among other things, negligence based on the violation of a nondelegable duty, a verdict against the master may stand notwithstanding a favorable verdict in favor of the servant.

3. Appeal and Error - Review - Sufficiency of Instructions as a Whole.

Where the instructions as a whole correctly state the law, a verdict based on the evidence will not be disturbed, though some instruction alone may not fully state the law.

4. Negligence - Contributory Negligence and Assumption of Risk Questions for Jury.

Under the Constitution the defense of contributory negligence and assumption of risk is a question of fact for jury, under proper instruction from the court.

Appeal from District Court, Carter County; John B. Odgen, Judge.

Action by Mildred Valley McKee, administratrix of the estate of Joe McKee, deceased, against the Southern Drilling Company and Henry J. Hughes. Judgment for plaintiff against the defendant Southern Drilling Company; judgment for Henry J. Hughes against the plaintiff. The defendant Southern Drilling Company appeals from the judgment adverse to it. The plaintiff appeals from the judgment in favor of the defendant Henry J. Hughes. Affirmed.

Williams & Williams, for plaintiff in error, Southern Drilling Company, and for defendant in error Henry J. Hughes.

Dolman, Dyer & Dolman, for defendant In error Mildred Valley McKee, administratrix.

PER CURIAM.

¶1 This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court of Carter county. The plaintiff in eror, Southern Drilling Company, will be referred to herein as defendant company. Mildred Valley McKee, administratrix, will be referred to herein as plaintiff. Henry J. Hughes will be referred to herein as defendant Hughes.

¶2 The suit was instituted for the benefit of the widow and minor son against both defendants for the wrongful death of the decedent, Joe McKee. The plaintiff alleged her appointment and qualification as administratrix, and the death of her decedent, and alleged that the said death occurred while her decedent was engaged as derrick man, using rotary tools in drilling an oil well for the defendant company.

¶3 She further alleged that the defendant Hughes was the driller and was in charge of the drilling equipment and had supervision over the other men working with him. After describing the operation of the rotary tools, the plaintiff charged the defendants with negligence, in that the defendant company failed to furnish safe appliances and equipment and a safe place within which the said Joe McKee did his work, and failed to provide a safe method of doing the work. She particularly alleges that the defendant company furnished a traveling block with projecting corners or edges not properly guarded; that the defendant Hughes was negligent in that be operated the tools at a dangerous rate of speed, requiring the said decedent, Joe McKee, to work with undue speed and haste, and that the defendant Hughes was further negligent in that he did not watch the decedent, McKee, and the traveling block, a part of the machinery, at all times to prevent injury, and was not watching them at the time the accident occurred. The defendant company filed an answer admitting its corporate existence, admitting that the decedent, McKee, was employed as a derrick man for it on the date alleged; that he suffered injuries on that date which caused his death. It denied all other material allegations of the petition and pleaded contributory negligence. The answer of the defendant Hughes was similar to the answer of the defendant company. The plaintiff replied to these answers in the form of general denials.

¶4 The cause came on for trial. Verdict was rendered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant company. Verdict was rendered in favor of the defendant Hughes and against the plaintiff. The plaintiff and the defendants each filed motion for new trial, directed to the adverse judgments against them. The motions for new trial wore both overruled and denied. The action is properly here on petition in error and cross-petition in error, with case-made attached.

¶5 The defendant company asks reversal on 13 assignments of errors. It has briefed these assignments of errors under seven propositions.

¶6 The plaintiff asks reversal on cross-petition in error, supported by some argument, but not by any authorities. It is evident from the case-made that the defendant Hughes was named as a codefendant to prevent the removal of the case to federal court, since the defendant company is a foreign corporation.

¶7 In order to Properly understand the errors assigned by the defendant company, it is necessary to make a somewhat detailed statement of the facts in the case. The accident to the decedent, Joe McKee, which resulted in his death shortly thereafter, occurred while he was engaged in drilling a well for oil in the Oklahoma City oil field. There were six men employed in drilling the well. The defendant Hughes was the driller, and was in charge, having authority to direct all of the other men, to employ men, or to discharge men. The well had been drilled to a depth of approximately 6,000 feet. The decedent, McKee, was performing the duties of what is referred to as "derrick man." At the time of the accident, the crew was engaged in running pipe into the hole. There was six-inch casing in the hole and four-inch pipe was being run therein. The pipe was stacked perpendicular against the portion of the rig referred to as the "finger board." Four joints of pipe were joined together, constituting a length of approximately 90 feet, and referred to as a "fourble" of pipe. The derrick man worked on what is referred to as the "fourble board," which is a platform approximately 40 inches wide, built across the derrick, and on one side thereof, approximately 95 feet above the floor of the derrick. The "finger board" is a board eight or ten feet ill length at the same elevation ass the "fourble board," and is at right angles thereto. At intervals of six inches there are small rods IS inches in length at right angles to the finger board and parallel to the fourble board, being placed in that manner to prevent the fourbles of pipes which rest against it from sliding. The derrick man, in this case the decedent, McKee, is that member of the drilling crew who works on the fourble board, his duties being to have the fourbles, of pipe in the proper position and to clamp the latches of the traveling block to the fourble of pipe as the traveling block reaches the elevation of the fourble board. The traveling block is a large instrument used to elevate the fourble of pipe and then let it be, dropped in position over the mouth of the well. The other Pipe, which had already been placed in the well, was held in position by mean of clips. It was the duty of other members of the crew to screw the bottom of the fourble of pipe to the top of the pipe in the well, then remove the clips and by means of the operation of the machinery the pipe would descend the length of the fourble into the well, and clips be attached. Then the driller released the traveling block and elevated it and the elevators for the next fourble of pipe. It was the duty of the derrick man to have another fourble of pipe ready when the elevator block was again brought to the level of the fourble board.

¶8 The evidence in the case at bar shows that 60 fourbles of pipe had been lowered into the well, that there were 18 more in the finger board, and that they were at the greatest distance from the fourble board. The evidence further shows that at the rate the work was being performed about one minute was consumed with each fourble of pipe; that the duties of the derrick man required him to steady the fourble of pipe while it was being screwed to the pipe in the well; that he had approximately 15 seconds from the time when he was no longer required to steady this pipe until he walked to the finger board and brought another fourble of pipe in position to be clamped by the traveling block on its way up; that he could not let the pipe fall against the fourble board, but must steady it to keep it from being bent.

¶9 The evidence further shows that the traveling block was not of the latest model; that it had square corners; that it passed in a very few inches of the fourble board; that the derrick man was provided with a safety belt, with a rope attached to the belt and attached to a stationary bar on the other side of the fourble board; that he must pass over the fingers of the finger board to get the more distant fourbles of pipe; that if he walked around on the finger board itself, it would have been necessary for him to untie his safety rope. The evidence shows that when he fell to the elevator floor his safety belt was broken; the rope attached to his safety belt had been frazzled by coming in contact with the square edges of the traveling block. Frazzles of the rope were found on the corners of the traveling block and paint had been rubbed from...