Stricklen v. Pearson Const. Co., No. 32415.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtWEAVER
Citation169 N.W. 628,185 Iowa 95
Decision Date14 December 1918
Docket NumberNo. 32415.
PartiesSTRICKLEN v. PEARSON CONST. CO.

185 Iowa 95
169 N.W. 628

STRICKLEN
v.
PEARSON CONST.
CO.

No. 32415.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Dec. 14, 1918.


Appeal from District Court, Polk County; C. A. Dudley, Judge.

Action at law to recover damages for personal injury. The material facts are stated in the opinion. There was a judgment for the defendant for costs, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

[169 N.W. 628]

Chester J. Eller, of Des Moines, for appellant.

Sullivan & Sullivan and Miller & Wallingford, all of Des Moines, for appellee.


WEAVER, J.

The defendant company was engaged in the construction of a building in the city of Des Moines, and in the course of such work excavated a hole or pit in which to lay the foundation of a pier. The plaintiff, being then in the employ of the defendant, was by its foreman sent into the pit to perform certain labor there, and while so engaged the earth caved in upon him, causing him serious injury. Both parties had expressed their consent to the terms of the Workmen's Compensation Act (Acts 35th Gen. Assem. c. 147), and in compliance with the terms of said statute plaintiff was awarded damages or compensation for his injury, since which time the defendant has paid and plaintiff has received the installments of such compensation as they have become due. Plaintiff now brings this action at law to recover from the company exemplary damages in addition to the compensation which has already been awarded him. In support of this claim he alleges that his injuries were received by the gross and reckless negligence of the defendant and its foreman, and that, while plaintiff has received and accepted the compensation awarded him under the Workmen's Compensation Act, it was not received or accepted in full, or in release, or in satisfaction of his claim for exemplary damages, for which he now demands a recovery. To this petition a demurrer was filed and sustained, and plaintiff thereupon filed an amended and substituted petition, alleging that Alexander Pearson is the “sole owner and proprietor” of the Pearson Construction Company, and his name is therefore substituted as defendant, and he is charged with negligence resulting in plaintiff's injury in the manner already described. It is further alleged that it was the duty of defendant, acting with the Industrial Commissioner, to fix the standard of safety for safety appliances and places of work; that this duty was not performed, and for this reason defendant cannot rely upon the protection of the statute as a defense to plaintiff's claim. The defendant moved to strike the amended and substituted petition as being a mere repetition of the matters in the original petition to which demurrer had been sustained. The motion was sustained, and plaintiff refusing to further plead, and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
21 practice notes
  • Amos v. Prom, Civ. No. 571.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Northern District of Iowa
    • September 30, 1953
    ...exceed compensatory damages in some cases; Brause v. Brause, 1920, 190 Iowa 329, 177 N.W. 65; Stricklen v. Pearson Const. Co., 1918, 185 Iowa 95, 169 N.W. 628; Wildeboar v. Petersen, 1918, 182 Iowa 1185, 166 N.W. 464, reversed where $5,000 exemplary damages and $150 compensatory damages; So......
  • Stockdale v. Agrico Chemical Co., Div. of Con. Oil Co., Civ. No. 69-C-2010-C.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Northern District of Iowa
    • March 21, 1972
    ...for exemplary damages also fails as actual damages must be shown before exemplary damages may be allowed. Stricklen v. Pearson Const. Co., 185 Iowa 95, 97, 98, 169 N.W. 628, 629; Kinney v. Cady, 232 Iowa 403, 412, 4 N.W.2d 225, 229; Shannon v. Gaar, 234 Iowa 1360, 1364, 15 N.W.2d 257, 259; ......
  • Gregory v. Sorenson, No. 40973.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 5, 1932
    ...1134, 221 N. W. 802, 804), supra; Brause v. Brause, 190 Iowa, 329, 177 N. W. 65;Stricklen v. Pearson Construction Co., 185 Iowa, 95, 169 N. W. 628;Union Mill Co. v. Prenzler (100 Iowa, 540, 69 N. W. 876), supra; Saunders v. Mullen, 66 Iowa, 728, 24 N. W. 529;Harvester Co. v. Hardware Co. (1......
  • Barrino v. Radiator Specialty Co., No. 439A84
    • United States
    • North Carolina United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • February 18, 1986
    ...damages are barred, punitive damages are also barred. North v. United States Steel Corp., 495 F.2d 810; Stricklen v. Pearson Constr. Co., 185 Iowa 95, 169 N.W. 628 (1918); Roof v. Velsicol Chem. Corp., 380 F.Supp. 1373 (N.D.Ohio 1974); Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Stevenson, 212 Tenn. 178, 368 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
21 cases
  • Amos v. Prom, Civ. No. 571.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Northern District of Iowa
    • September 30, 1953
    ...exceed compensatory damages in some cases; Brause v. Brause, 1920, 190 Iowa 329, 177 N.W. 65; Stricklen v. Pearson Const. Co., 1918, 185 Iowa 95, 169 N.W. 628; Wildeboar v. Petersen, 1918, 182 Iowa 1185, 166 N.W. 464, reversed where $5,000 exemplary damages and $150 compensatory damages; So......
  • Stockdale v. Agrico Chemical Co., Div. of Con. Oil Co., Civ. No. 69-C-2010-C.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. Northern District of Iowa
    • March 21, 1972
    ...for exemplary damages also fails as actual damages must be shown before exemplary damages may be allowed. Stricklen v. Pearson Const. Co., 185 Iowa 95, 97, 98, 169 N.W. 628, 629; Kinney v. Cady, 232 Iowa 403, 412, 4 N.W.2d 225, 229; Shannon v. Gaar, 234 Iowa 1360, 1364, 15 N.W.2d 257, 259; ......
  • Gregory v. Sorenson, No. 40973.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 5, 1932
    ...1134, 221 N. W. 802, 804), supra; Brause v. Brause, 190 Iowa, 329, 177 N. W. 65;Stricklen v. Pearson Construction Co., 185 Iowa, 95, 169 N. W. 628;Union Mill Co. v. Prenzler (100 Iowa, 540, 69 N. W. 876), supra; Saunders v. Mullen, 66 Iowa, 728, 24 N. W. 529;Harvester Co. v. Hardware Co. (1......
  • Barrino v. Radiator Specialty Co., No. 439A84
    • United States
    • North Carolina United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • February 18, 1986
    ...damages are barred, punitive damages are also barred. North v. United States Steel Corp., 495 F.2d 810; Stricklen v. Pearson Constr. Co., 185 Iowa 95, 169 N.W. 628 (1918); Roof v. Velsicol Chem. Corp., 380 F.Supp. 1373 (N.D.Ohio 1974); Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Stevenson, 212 Tenn. 178, 368 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT