Schmidt v. Block

• Decision Date: 31 March 1886
• Citation: 76 Ga. 823
• Parties: Schmidt. vs. Block
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

76 Ga. 823

Schmidt. vs. Block

Supreme Court of the State of Georgia

MARCH TERM, 1886.

^*.

Jackson, Chief Justice.

[William C. Schmidt brought suit against Frank E. Block to recover damages for a personal injury, alleging as follows:

"The petition of William C. Schmidt respectfully shows that Frank E. Clock, of said county, has injured and damaged him in the sum of ten thousand dollars; for that, heretofore, to-wit: On or about the 16th of November, 1881, ho was employed by said Frank E. Block to labor in and about his cracker and candy factory in the city of Atlanta, in the removal of freight and goods from the sidewalks on Alabama and Pryor streets, adjoining said defendant's factory, and in transporting goods of said Frank E. Block from one place to another, as the needs of defendant's business required, and to place such goods in different parts of defendant's said cracker and candy factory, up and down stairs, as ordered by defendant.

Petitioner further shows that, in the discharge of his duty to, and while working for, defendant in his said factory, he undertook to place, and did place a barrel of syrup or molasses in an elevator, erected in said candy and cracker factory of, and by defendant, which was worked by steam, and which was used and operated by said Frank E. Block in carrying goods from the cellar to the upper stories of defendant's factory and other places therein, as defendant's business required. Petitioner alleges that ho did roll said largo barrel syrup or molasses from the sidewalk to defendant's elevator, which was waiting to receive and remove the same from the ground floor to the cellar, and in performance of his duty to said Frank E. Block, and while working for him, did place, or attempt to place, said large barrel of syrup or molasses in proper position on or in said defendant's elevator, and while yet engaged in such act and before he had released his hold or grasp on such heavy barrel, without fault or negligence on petitioner's part, or without his carelessness contributing thereto, the said elevator of defendant was improperly and prematurely [put in motion], without fault on petitioner's part, whereby the said heavy barrel of syrup or molasses was precipitated on petitioner, knocking him down and personally injuring your petitioner. Your petitioner says said Frank F. Block failed to provide and furnish suitable catches, stops or locks for such elevator, or competent skilled persons to watch or run the same. Petitioner charges it was no part of his duty to attend to the running of said elevator, but...