Rhine v. A. Schall Co.

148 N.W. 90, 96 Neb. 355, 1914 Neb. LEXIS 61
Nebraska Supreme Court·Decided June 23, 1914·No. No. 17,768·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

Barnes, J.

This action was commenced in tbe district court for Douglas county by tbe widow of Joseph Rhine, deceased, as tbe administratrix of bis estate, for damages resulting from bis death while employed, by tbe defendant. Tbe amount sued for was $10,090. A trial resulted in a ver[356] diet and judgment for §1,500, and the defendant has appealed. It appears that at the conclusion of plaintiff’s evidence the defendant filed a motion requesting the district court to direct a verdict in its favor. The motion was overruled, and thereupon the defendant introduced its testimony, and the motion was renewed, and- was again overruled.

It is contended by the defendant that the court erred in overruling its motions, for the reason that the evidence is insufficient to sustain a judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The record discloses that the defendant is in the business of cutting, dressing, handling and dealing in stone, having a yard and factory in the city of Omaha, where heavy blocks of stone are received, sawed and planed, and where defendant employs a large number of men. The stones when they come to the yards are handled and moved by means of á large traveling crane, so arranged as to carry them to any part.of the ground, and to the saws where they are cut into the desired shapes and dimensions, and from the saws to any place where it may be necessary to store them.

There is no conflict in the evidence as to the manner in Avhich plaintiff’s decedent met his death. Certain slabs or blocks of stone áy2 to 5 inches in thickness, 4% to 5 feet wide, and 9y2 to 11 feet long, of corresponding weights, were removed from the saws and placed on edge against the timbers of one of the piers or frames supporting the tracks on which the carriers ran in removing the stone from place to place as necessity or convenience required. When so placed against the uprights referred to, they rested upon stringers or timbers laid upon the ground, Avhich were solid, being covered Avith chips, sprawls, and refuse of stone, and the dust accumulated from stone sawings. Some three or four of the slabs had been laid down on the stringers, and preparations were being made to transfer them to the saws. One of the slabs was left standing on its edge leaning against the timbers. There was some little space or distance between those lying down and the ones standing against the timbers. The decedent, [357] Mr. Rhine, went in between them for the purpose of adjusting the apparatus by which they were to be lifted, and was working with his back toward the standing stone when it fell upon him and crushed him so badly that he almost instantly died.

The evidence is without conflict that the decedent had been employed by the defendant for a long time as a hook-man; that, when the stones were brought to the yard on flat cars, decedent, with his assistants, took charge of the moving of the large blocks from the cars to the yard. He selected the place where they were to be deposited, and, by the use of a whistle as a signal, directed the engineer, who was situated in a room on the elevated tracks, where and how the stones should be placed. He also had charge of the signals by which directions were given to the engineer in handling all stones in the yard, both before and after they had been to the saws, and he and his assistants followed the general orders and directions of the superintendent, but in all matters of detail decedent exercised his own judgment.

It was alleged in the plaintiff’s petition that all of the slabs or stones were of great weight, and that for their proper support it was necessary that they should be placed on firm, solid ground; and, further, that they should be placed on suitable heavy, sound timbers of sufficient size and length to create a solid and stable foundation; that the defendant company negligently and wrongfully failed to supply the place with suitable, solid, stable ground on which to lay said timber, but, on the contrary, negligently and wrongfully filled the place where said slabs were to be located with soft dirt and refuse, and thereby negligently and wrongfully directed and instructed the said decedent to locate and place said slabs thereon. It was also alleged that defendant negligently and wrongfully failed and neglected to furnish sound and suitable timbers of adequate size and length on Avhich to pile said slabs of stone, but, on the contrary, said defendant negligently and wrongfully furnished a place as a support for slabs to be placed thereon of short pieces of wood that were [358] rotten and unsound and of inadequate dimensions as to length, breadth, and thickness.

By its answer defendant admitted its corporate character, its line of business, that plaintiff was the widow of Joseph Rhine, that prior to his death Rhine was in the service of the defendant, and that he received the injuries from which he died. All other allegations of the petition were denied, and contributory negligence on the part of the decedent was alleged, as well as assumption of the risks incident to his employment. The reply was a general denial.

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

Rhine v. A. Schall Co., 148 N.W. 90, 96 Neb. 355, 1914 Neb. LEXIS 61 (Neb. 1914).

148 N.W. 90 (Rhine v. A. Schall Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hines v. Martel Telephone Co.
255 N.W. 233 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1934)