Va. Dare Stores, Inc. v. Schuman, 3.

Citation1 A.2d 897
Decision Date26 October 1938
Docket NumberNo. 3.,3.
PartiesVIRGINIA DARE STORES, Inc. v. SCHUMAN.
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals
1 A.2d 897

VIRGINIA DARE STORES, Inc.
v.
SCHUMAN.

No. 3.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

Oct. 26, 1938.


Appeal from Superior Court of Baltimore City; Joseph N. Ulman, Judge.

Action by Charles Schuman, to his own use and to the use of the State Accident Fund, against Virginia Dare Stores, Incorporated, a body corporate, to recover sums paid to first-named plaintiff as compensation and for injuries resulting from the alleged negligence of the defendant. From an adverse judgment, defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

Argued before BOND, C. J., and URNER, OFFUTT, PARKE, SLOAN, MITCHELL, SHEHAN, and JOHNSON, JJ.

Walter V. Harrison, of Baltimore (Paul L. Cordish, of Baltimore, on the brief), for appellant

1 A.2d 898

W. Hamilton Whiteford and Omar D. Crothers, Jr., both of Baltimore (Albert Levin, of Baltimore, on the brief), for appellees.

JOHNSON, Judge.

On July 1, 1936, and for sometime prior thereto, Charles Schuman was employed by Queen City Window Cleaning Company. Virginia Dare Stores, Inc., owner of a store at 15 West Lexington Street, Baltimore, Maryland, had previously engaged York Ice Machine Company to install an air conditioning system in its store. As a result of the installation, the east and south walls of the store were left spotted and dirty, whereupon York Ice Machine Company employed Queen City Window Cleaning Company to clean them. On the morning of July 1, 1936, Schuman and one Parr, a co-employee, were sent by the manager of their employer to the Virginia Dare Store to clean the walls in question under direction of Pillar, Manager of the last named store. Their equipment consisted of buckets, sponges, cleaning powder, a stepladder and a board, eighteen feet long, ten inches wide and two inches thick. After having been shown by Pillar the walls which their employer had directed them to clean, they proceeded with the work. During its progress Schuman sustained personal injuries, allegedly as a result of the negligent conduct of the manager of Virginia Dare Stores, Inc. Schuman's employer carried Workmen Compensation Insurance in the State Accident Fund, and after collecting from that agency compensation for his injuries, Schuman and the insurer brought suit under provisions of Section 58, Article 101 of the Code and secured a judgment from which the present appeal is taken.

We will first make some reference to the pleadings. To the plaintiff's declaration, as amplified by his bill of particulars filed in response to a demand of defendant, a demurrer was filed and overruled. It is alleged in the narr that Schuman on July 1, 1936, at the solicitation of the defendant, its agents and servants, was in the store of the latter in Baltimore, Maryland, for the purposes of washing walls therein, and while so engaged in those duties stood upon the molding of a dress case in order to reach the walls he was to wash after he had first been assured by the defendant's agents and servants, and particularly its manager, that the said molding and dress case were safe to stand upon, but that the dress case and molding attached thereto, contrary to the assurance and warranties of the defendant, were unsound and unsafe for such purpose, all of which the defendant, its agents and servants, knew or should have known before directing and requesting the plaintiff to stand upon the dress case and molding to wash said walls, and that while standing on said molding of the dress case engaged in washing the walls of the defendant's store the molding broke from the case, threw the plaintiff to the floor, and he thereby sustained serious, permanent and painful injuries, solely as the result of the defendant's negligence and without any negligence on his part contributing thereto. It is further alleged that plaintiff was at the time employed by Queen City Window Cleaning Company, who was insured under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act in the State Accident Fund; that Schuman filed a claim with his employer's insurer for compensation based upon injuries he received arising out of and in the course of his employment and the Commission ordered the insurer to pay unto him certain Workmen's compensation on account of said accident and injuries, and to pay his medical expenses arising out of said accident; that the equitable plaintiff joined in the action against the defendant under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation statute, Code Pub.Gen.Laws 1924, art. 101, § 1 et seq., and that liability of the State Accident Fund to pay the compensation award was' due solely to the fact that Schuman's accident and injuries arose out of and in the course of his employment; that said injuries were due solely to the negligence and want of care on the part of defendant, its servants and agents and legal liability was imposed upon the defendant to pay damages in respect thereto, and under the Workmen's Compensation Act, the State Accident Fund, one of the plaintiffs, was authorized to enforce the liability of the defendant to Schuman for its use to the extent of compensation awarded or to be awarded him and his medical expenses incident thereto, and for the use and benefit of Schuman for the excess of damages sustained over and above the amount of compensation awarded or to be awarded.

These allegations are sufficient to place Schuman at the time of his injuries upon the premises of the defendant either as the employee of Queen City Window

1 A.2d 899

Cleaning Company prosecuting the work his employer sent him to do under direction of Pillar, the defendant's...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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