Yarbrough v. Wisconsin Lumber Co.
| Decision Date | 09 May 1919 |
| Docket Number | No. 2421.,2421. |
| Citation | 211 S.W. 713 |
| Parties | YARBROUGH v. WISCONSIN LUMBER CO. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Pemiscot County; Sterling H. McCarty, Judge.
Action by Rob Yarbrough against the Wisconsin Lumber Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Ward & Reeves, of Caruthersville, for appellant.
H. N. Phillips, of Caruthersville, and J. R. Brewer, of New Madrid, for respondent.
Having received personal injuries while working at defendant's sawmill, the plaintiff sued and recovered judgment. The defendant appeals in due form, and asks this court to reverse such judgment absolutely for want of evidence to sustain the verdict, and, if we refuse that, then to reverse and remand the case for new trial on account of error in the instructions and in the admission of evidence.
At the time of his injury the plaintiff was operating what is termed the feed machinery of the saw mill. This consisted of a movable carriage, on which the log to be sawed was placed and held in position against the saw. When the saw passed through the log, this carriage was reversed and thrown back, to start over again. The shifting back and forward of the carriage was done by steam power, by means of a "shotgun feed," as it is called. This shotgun feed consisted of a long 12-inch cylinder or gun, in which works a rod or piston fastened to the movable carriage. This piston is forced back and forth by steam let in alternately at either end of the cylinder through valves. At the end of the piston is the "follower head," which is large enough to fit tightly in this cylinder, and when steam is let in through the valve at one end it exhausts at the other and drives the piston to that end. This operation is then reversed, and the piston is driven to the other end. The follower head of the piston working in the cylinder is kept tight by means of rings around same, and when these rings become worn the piston head becomes loose in the cylinder, and steam escapes around the same, and thereby it loses compression and power. By working the valves the operator of this machinery regulates the amount of steam entering the cylinder, and the consequent movement of the feed carriage. The cause of plaintiff's injury was that, while he was operating this feed carriage, one of the rings of the piston head broke, and a portion of it lodged under the valve, through which steam was being let Into the cylinder, and this held the value open —"cocked the valve," as it is termed—so that the operator could not shut off the steam. The result was that the piston, and with it the whole carriage on which plaintiff was standing, was thrown violently back till it struck the bumper, thereby precipitating the plaintiff violently to the ground and inflicting the injuries he sues for.
The negligence complained of is that defendant permitted this ring to become so worn and defective as to render the operation of the shotgun feed unsafe and dangerous to the person operating the same. The evidence clearly shows that this ring broke in the manner stated and that it was found to have been considerably worn. It is also shown that any one caring for the machinery can readily tell when these rings become worn by the steam escaping past the follower head. One witness testified that "when the rings are worn it causes steam to leak, and you cannot operate the carriage with the same force; that the breaking of the ring is what caused the accident." The defendant's foreman admits that he knew this carriage was running defectively before the accident, and supposed it was on account of the ring being worn. The plaintiff testified that defendant's foreman told him just after the accident that he, the foreman, knew that these rings were worn and defective; that he had gotten new ones to replace them with, but was waiting till they shut down to make some other repairs. These rings had been in use two years or more.
The point most insisted on by defendant is that, though defendant's foreman knew these rings were considerably worn and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bond v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company
... ... that the bridge was defective and the piling therein were ... rotten. Yarbrough v. Wisconsin Lbr. Co., 211 S.W ... 713; Phillips v. Railroad, 211 Mo. 419; ... McDermott v ... ...
-
Henry v. First Nat. Bank
... ... City of ... Albany, 226 Mo.App. 529, 47 S.W.2d 233; Yarbrough v ... Wisconsin Lumber Co. (Mo. App.), 211 S.W. 713; State ... ex rel. S. S. Kresge Co. v ... ...
-
Rosenweig v. Wells
...said, "I am not going to stop the line for a man." This alleged statement was held not to be part of the res gestae. In Yarbrough v. Wisconsin Lumber Co., 211 S.W. 713, by defendant, it does not appear how soon after the accident or under what circumstances the declaration of the foreman, h......
-
Elliott v. Payne
...even injury to the particular individual. It is sufficient if some injury to some person is likely to happen from the defect. Yarbough v. Lumber Co., 211 S.W. 713. J. James T. Blair, J., concurs in paragraph four and the result. OPINION GRAVES, J. Action by the administrator of Earl D. Elli......