Wolski v. Knapp, Stout & Co.

• Decision Date: 23 April 1895
• Citation: 63 N.W. 87,90 Wis. 178
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
• Parties: WOLSKI v. KNAPP, STOUT & CO. COMPANY.

90 Wis. 178

63 N.W. 87

WOLSKI

v.KNAPP, STOUT & CO. COMPANY.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

April 23, 1895.

Appeal from circuit court, Dunn county; John K. Parish, Judge.

Action by Pauline Wolski, as administratrix of the estate of William Simons, deceased, against the Knapp, Stout & Co. Company. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

The action is brought by the plaintiff, as administratrix of the estate of her son, William Simons, to recover damages for the death of her decedent, by accident, while in the employment of the respondent, as its servant. The appellant's evidence tends to establish these facts: The deceased was a minor of the age of 18 years, large of his years, being about 6 feet tall, and weighing 180 pounds. He had been to school, and was of fully average intelligence. He was hired and sent by the respondent to work in its camps, in the lumber woods, as an assistant cook. There was at the time no vacant place for a cook. So he was set to work as chain tender, to assist in the skidding of logs. He was entirely without experience in this work, and the respondent knew that he was so inexperienced. He worked at this work about five days. The skidway at which he was working at the time of his death was at the foot of a steep hillside, about 30 feet long, and of about 20 feet elevation. It was his business to help the teamster, Wagner, to put the logs upon the skidway at the foot of this hill. To accomplish this the logs were hauled to the top of the hill, and then rolled down the hill to and upon the skidway. To do this successfully it was necessary to make the logs roll straight down the hill. So, sometimes, it became necessary, when the logs began to roll crooked, to turn or straighten them. In such cases the practice was to catch the log and hold it, or to go in front of it and hold it, so that it should go straight. “The catcher holds one end of it, if it starts crooked, so it will go straight.” It is a dangerous business, requiring judgment, skill, and experience, especially on such a steep sidehill as this. It was not safe, in such a place, to try to hold or to straighten a log after it had, by rolling, acquired some considerable momentum. The employés were not expected to catch and straighten logs which had acquired any considerable momentum. But the danger of trying to catch and to straighten the rolling logs cannot be fully understood and appreciated by persons inexperienced in that work. The inexperienced are likely to be deceived in judging of the speed and momentum of a rolling log, and of the practicability of stopping it, while experienced men are much less likely to be so deceived. One mode of catching logs which were to be straightened was by what is called a “back cant.” This is done with a cant hook, by a reverse application. One witness said, “It requires experience and practice to handle a cant hook.” There is danger in taking a back cant upon a rolling log. If the log has acquired considerable momentum, it cannot be stopped by a back cant, and there is danger that the man who tries it will be thrown, before he realizes the danger, over the log, in front of it, and will be run over by it. This danger is not obvious, but is to be learned by experience or by instruction. The respondent did not require or expect its employés to stop and straighten logs in this way, yet it was frequently done. Deceased was not instructed, and did not understand or appreciate the danger of this mode of trying to stop and straighten the logs. He had heard the foreman tell a man who was trying to take a back cant upon a rolling log, “not to do that.” At the time of the accident he was at work with the witness Wagner. They had just started a log down the hill. It stopped against a larger log. They turned it over the larger log. Just as they had turned it over the...