Grimmel v. Boyd

142 N.W. 893, 94 Neb. 246, 1913 Neb. LEXIS 232
CourtNebraska Supreme Court
DecidedJune 26, 1913
DocketNo. 17,339
StatusPublished

This text of 142 N.W. 893 (Grimmel v. Boyd) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Grimmel v. Boyd, 142 N.W. 893, 94 Neb. 246, 1913 Neb. LEXIS 232 (Neb. 1913).

Opinion

Hamer, J.

Gounsél for tbe appellants are to be congratulated upon the clearness of their contentions. The plaintiff in the court below recovered a judgment against the defendants for damages in a personal injury case, where it is claimed that the plaintiff’s decedent was killed by being caused to step into an elevator shaft through the negligence of the defendants. The widow, son and daughter of the late Governor Boyd are made defendants. They are alleged to be [248]*248the owners of the Boyd Theatre building in Omaha, which at the time of the unfortunate tragedy contained 13 or 14 rooms occupied as offices or studios. Of these, the corner room at the west end of the hall on the fourth floor was occupied by Mrs. Walter Dale as a studio for instruction in vocal music. Miss Bessie Chambers, the decedent, had been Mrs. Dale’s pupil for a period of about six months, and had been going to her studio at 5 o’clock in the afternoon once a week for that time. There is a passenger elevator in the building, the entrance to which on the fourth floor is about 55 feet from the west end of the hall on that floor, and about 40 feet from the door of Mrs. Dale’s studio. The hallway is about 5 feet wide, and perhaps 80 feet in length, or a little more. There is a window in the west end of the hall facing the Y. M. C. A. building across the street, and another window about 20 feet east of the elevator on the south side of the hall, which faces an alley. The entrance to the elevator is similar to the doors to the offices. The door to the elevator sets into the north Avail of the hall '8 or 10 inches from the outside of the door casing. The elevator AAras in charge of a colored man named Sam Madison. There was an electric light or lamp in the elevator cage, which it is claimed by the defense was always lighted. On March 16, 1910, Miss Bessie Chambers was at Mrs. Dale’s studio with Miss Mary Ells-worth. After she had finished her lesson the three ladies, Mrs. Dale, Miss Ellsworth and Miss Chambers, left the studio together and Avalked along the hall east towards the elevator. It is said that Miss Chambers was on the north of the hall on the side nearest the elevator, and that Miss Ellsworth was on the south side of the hall, and that Mrs. Dale was in the middle, as the three walked abreast toward the elevator. Tt was about half past five in the afternoon, and was growing dark in-the hallAvay. It is claimed by the defendants that Madison, who was in charge of the elevator, said nothing to any of the ladies, and that no one of them said anything to him, also that the ladies saw this colored man standing at the window which faced to the [249]*249south. It is further claimed by the defense' that this man did not approach the elevator, and that be made no movement of any kind, and that he remained in the position where he was when the ladies first saw him near the window until after the accident happened which resulted in the death of Miss Chambers. It is claimed by the defense that Mrs. Dale did not lock her door when Miss Ellsworth and Miss Chambers left the studio, and that she was not leaving for the afternoon, and therefore was not herself intending to use the elevator, and that as the three young women walked down the hall from Mrs. Dale’s door toward the elevator they were laughing and talking, and that the subject of their conversation was facial massage; that when they got to the elevator entrance, or near it, they stopped; that they could not have seen the opening if they had looked. There is no evidence that Miss Chambers did not see the elevator entrance, or that she had her attention called in any way to the fact that the elevator itself was not there ready to he entered. It is further claimed by the defense that Miss Ellsworth did not look to see whether the door to the elevator was opened or closed, and it is claimed that Mrs. Dale saw that the elevator was not there. It is not, however, claimed that Mrs. Dale or Miss Ellsworth called the attention of Miss Chambers to the fact that the elevator was not there. Miss Chambers seems to have been looking toward Mrs. Dale. Just before she stepped into the shaft, where she fell to her death, she said to Mrs. Dale: “You haven’t.” As she said that, she turned from Mrs. Dale and stepped into the elevator shaft, fell to the bottom of the shaft, and was instantly killed. The door of the elevator shaft was open, and the elevator itself was above the floor.

That the matter may be the better understood, we quote a small part of the evidence from Miss Ellsworth’s testimony as to just what transpired at the elevator: “Q. I don’t care to go any further with it. When Miss Chambers made this remark of these two words, ‘You haven’t,’ she was looking towards Mrs. Dale? A. Yes. Q.'That was [250]*250away from the opening into the elevator? A. Yes. Q. And instantly, without looking into the opening of the elevator, she turned and stepped in? A. Yes.” Mrs. Dale’s statement is as follows: “And as we stood there talking and laughing for a few seconds, I think it must have been inside a half a minute, and I made a little remark, and she laughingly answered me,, and turned and stepped quickly into the shaft.” Miss Ellsworth testified: “Q. You should say she stepped first before she looked into the shaft? A. Yes; she turned as she stepped, but— Q. The turning and the stepping were about the same time? A. Yes. Q. She didn’t look before she stepped, however, did she? A. I don’t tlvrnk so.” Mrs. Dale’ testified: “Q. Miss Chambers didn’t look toward the opening into the elevator before she stepped into it, did she, Mrs. Dale? A. I didn’t see her look. * * * Q. So, if she had looked, turned around and looked at the shaft or the opening into the elevator, she could have seen it; she was where she could have seen? A. You mean I could have seen if she looked? Q. No; she was where she could have seen if she had looked? A. Yes. * * * Q. Did I ask you, Mrs. Dale, whether Miss Chambers stepped into the shaft sideways, or did she turn clear around and step in it facing, squarely facing, the shaft? A. My remembrance is she wheeled on her left foot and stepped in with her right. Q. Stepped forward with the right foot? A. Yes.”

By a stipulation it appears that Madison was up on the fourth floor. Why he was up there no one seems to know. There is no showing that Miss Chambers saw that the elevator was not there, or that Miss Ellsworth or Mrs. Dale called her attention to the fact that it was not there, or that the light, claimed to be in it, was not shining. The elevator had gone up the elevator shaft. It does not appear that there is any evidence to show why it went up the shaft.

Appellants complain of the eighth instruction, which is as follows: “By negligence of the defendants in this case is meant a failure on the part of the defendants’ servant to [251]*251exercise that high degree of care required of a common carrier of passengers, as elsewhere defined in instruction No. 4. By contributory negligence is meant any negligence of plaintiff directly contributing to the accident. By. ordinary care is meant that amount or degree of care which common prudence and a proper regard for one’s own safety required under the circumstances shown in the evidence.”

As the fourth instruction was referred to in tlie eighth, we copy that part of it which we deem material. It is contended by the appellants that they were not negligent-in fact, and that they should not have been held to be negligent as a matter of law.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Omaha Horse Railway Co. v. Doolittle
7 Neb. 481 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1878)
Village of Culbertson v. Holliday
69 N.W. 853 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1897)
Knapp v. Jones
70 N.W. 19 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1897)
City of Beatrice v. Forbes
103 N.W. 1069 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1905)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
142 N.W. 893, 94 Neb. 246, 1913 Neb. LEXIS 232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grimmel-v-boyd-neb-1913.