Weeklund v. Southern Or. Co.

• Decision Date: 08 July 1891
• Citation: 20 Or. 591,27 P. 260
• Parties: WEEKLUND v. SOUTHERN OREGON CO.
• Court: Oregon Supreme Court

27 P. 260

20 Or. 591

WEEKLUND v. SOUTHERN OREGON CO.

Supreme Court of Oregon

July 8, 1891

(Syllabus by the Court.)

1. Facts examined, and held that there was no evidence before the jury upon which the court could properly submit the question of defendant's negligence to the jury; and held, further, that when large timbers were being moved on rollers, and those engaged in the work failed to keep the rollers at right angles with the piece of timber being moved, and by reason thereof it slued around so that the end struck a lumber pile which caused some planks to fall upon the plaintiff's leg, by means of which he was injured, that such negligence was the negligence of the plaintiff's fellow servants, for which the defendant is not responsible.

2. Where the plaintiff assisted in the construction of the chute for moving large timbers, and had as complete knowledge of its sufficiency for the purpose for which it was constructed as the defendant, and received an injury in the moving of the timbers down said chute, defendant is not responsible on account of its alleged unsuitableness for the purpose for which it was used.

Appeal from circuit court, Coos county; M.L. PIPES, Judge.

This is an action to recover damages for negligence. The complaint substantially charges that on the 28th of June, 1889, the defendant did saw and deliver from its said mill 12 extraordinary large timbers, of about the size of 20 x 22 inches, and 88 feet long, under the direction of C.F Lovelace, its foreman and manager, and William Foley superintendent; and said defendant did, through its said foreman and manager and its said superintendent, direct the plaintiff to assist in removing said timbers from the mill carriage on the wharf into the waters of Coos bay, in front of said wharf, and plaintiff did so assist, and did while so doing exercise due care and diligence; but that by reason of said defendant being grossly negligent in not supplying proper apparatus to handle and remove said timbers, and by reason of the unskillfulness, carelessness, and incompetency of its said foreman, managers, and superintendents, it did attempt to remove the same from said track to said bay across a certain loose pile of lumber then on said wharf, under the direction of said William Foley, who was then its foreman, manager, and superintendent, directly in charge of said work, and which said pile of lumber was wholly inadequate to support the weight of said timber; that while so doing, the last handled of said timbers did, by reason of the defendant's gross negligence and the incompetency and unskillful and careless handling of said timber, and the insufficiency of said support, and without any fault or negligence on the part of said plaintiff, fall on said pile of lumber on which plaintiff was working, as directed by the defendant through its said foreman, manager, and superintendent, William Foley who was at said time directly in charge of said work, causing said lumber pile to fall, and a part of which did fall on and break, fracture, and bruise the right leg of the plaintiff and by reason thereof the right foot of the plaintiff was necessarily amputated between the ankle and knee, causing plaintiff great anguish, etc. It is then, in substance alleged,...