Snyder v. Town of Ashboro

• Decision Date: 21 December 1921
• Docket Number: 477.
• Citation: 110 S.E. 84,182 N.C. 708
• Parties: SNYDER v. TOWN OF ASHBORO.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

110 S.E. 84

182 N.C. 708

SNYDER v. TOWN OF ASHBORO.

No. 477.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

December 21, 1921

Appeal from Superior Court, Randolph County; Bryson, Judge.

Action by William S. Snyder against the Town of Ashboro. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. No error.

Civil action for personal injury alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant. This action was instituted by the plaintiff, Snyder, to recover damages on account of injuries he sustained while working as head miller of the Southern Crown Milling Company in the town of Ashboro, N.C. The mill was operated by electric current furnished by the defendant from a municipally owned and operated plant. On the day of the injury, the town had notified the Southern Crown Milling Company and the plaintiff that it was necessary to suspend operations pending work on the transmission line necessitating the removal of some of the poles and the severance of the power transmission line. The transmission line, which was composed of three separate wires, connected with a three-phase electric motor at the plant of the Southern Crown Milling Company, by which the machinery of the mill was operated. This transmission line composed of the three wires, carried an alternating three-phase current of 2,300 voltage. There was testimony indicating that in the course of the work that was done by the employees of the defendant upon the occasion in question, the relative positions of two of the three wires constituting the transmission line became transposed, and resulted in the motor at the mill running backward instead of forward as it had been accustomed to do, when the current was turned on. After the lapse of sufficient time, as he thought, for the work to be completed, but before receiving actual notice that the power lines were ready for use, the plaintiff caused an employee of the mill to switch on the current of electricity and the plaintiff himself threw in gear the brakes or rolls in the usual way, starting the operation of the plant. The machinery thereby put in operation all operated backward and opposite to the normal or proper way. The plaintiff, who insists he did not at the time notice that the machinery was operating backward, went to the first brake or set of rolls the place where the grinding of the grain was commenced. The brake contained two horizontal corrugated or grooved iron rolls, side by side, revolving together at the top and away from each other at the bottom when in use in the proper way taking in the grain from above and crushing it as it passed between the corrugated rolls. These rolls were operated by belts and pulleys running at high speed in plain view of the operator. The plaintiff, immediately after putting this machinery in operation, went to the first brake, inserted his hand and arm in an opening in the stand underneath the rolls and, observing that the rolls were not crushing the wheat as they should, put his hand up against the revolving rolls, and his fingers were drawn inward, up and between the rolls, resulting in the injury to his hand and arm complained of. The plaintiff contends that it was necessary that he place his hands upon the revolving rolls of the brake as he did at the time of the injury for the purpose of determining whether or not they were properly adjusted, whether they were heating, and whether they were gummed up with wild onions or the crushed grain; and that it was customary for millers to put their hands upon the rolls while in operation as he did for that purpose. The defendant contends that this was neither necessary nor customary, and was dangerous and liable to cause injury, even when the rolls were...