St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co. v. Andrews

• Decision Date: 25 June 1906
• Citation: 96 S.W. 183
• Parties: ST. LOUIS, I. M. & S. RY. CO. v. ANDREWS.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

96 S.W. 183

ST. LOUIS, I. M. & S. RY. CO. v. ANDREWS.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

June 25, 1906.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Lonoke County; George M. Chapline, Judge.

Action by J. B. Andrews against the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

B. S. Johnson, for appellant. J. H. Harrod and Trimble & Robinson, for appellee.

McCULLOCH, J.

The plaintiff, J. B. Andrews, was employed by the defendant, St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company as assistant pump repairer, and sues to recover damages on account of an injury he received in falling from a ladder which he was descending on the side of a water tank. He was instructed by his superior to change the valves in the tank, and in doing so it became necessary to ascend the ladder to the top and go down to the bottom of the tank. After discharging all the water from the tank, he and his helper went into it and changed the valves, and when he started down the ladder on the outside the third round of the ladder from the top gave way under his handhold and he fell to the ground, a distance of about 36 feet, and was seriously injured.

The plaintiff, on the witness stand, described the occurrence, after receiving instructions to take his helper and change the valves of the tank, as follows: "I went over and got my tool sack and changed my clothes, and we went up on top of the tank; then went down to the bottom and took out the old valve and put in a new one. After we were through, I picked up my tool sack in my left hand, and started down. The third round pulled off, and I fell between 30 and 36 feet. I remember being in the air with a piece of the round in my right hand. Don't remember hitting the ground. The first I remember was when they had me over at the hospital." He introduced no evidence as to the condition of the ladder, at the time of the injury, but rested the case upon his own statement as above quoted. The defendant introduced as a witness R. F. Cook, foreman of the water department, who was the plaintiff's immediate superior, and he testified as to the condition of the ladder. He said that he went up this ladder on the same day and a short time before plaintiff's injury, and found it in good condition, and that he caused the ladder to be removed about two weeks later, and that the timbers were perfectly sound and in good condition except that the third round or step from the top had been pulled off, and also that the two bottom steps were off. He explained that the steps of the ladder were mitered into the supports or side beam, as well as nailed, and that he ascertained from examination of the ladder immediately after plaintiff's injury that where the step which had been pulled off under plaintiff's grasp joined the side beam or support, the lower side of the mitre joint was split out, showing a fresh break. The ladder had been in use about four years. The complaint alleges that the step of the ladder was rotten, dangerous, and unsafe, and that the defendant was guilty of negligence in not keeping the same in safe condition, so as to furnish the plaintiff, its servant, "a safe place in which to work." This allegation was denied, and the case was put to the jury upon this issue and under correct and appropriate instructions.

Does the evidence warrant a finding of negligence on the part of the defendant in failing to furnish its servant a safe place in which to work? The law of the case is plain. It is the duty of the master to exercise care in furnishing a reasonably safe place in which the servant is required to work, and to exercise ordinary care in discovering defects and in repairing them. The burden is upon the injured servant to show negligence on the part of the master in this regard before...