Vincennes Bridge Co. v. Guinn's Guardian

22 S.W.2d 300, 231 Ky. 772, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 374
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976)
DecidedDecember 3, 1929
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 22 S.W.2d 300 (Vincennes Bridge Co. v. Guinn's Guardian) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Vincennes Bridge Co. v. Guinn's Guardian, 22 S.W.2d 300, 231 Ky. 772, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 374 (Ky. 1929).

Opinion

Opinion of the Court by

Commissioner Hobson—

Reversing.

Cleveland Guinn, by bis guardian, brought this action to recover against the Vincennes Bridge Company *773 for a personal injury. On the trial of the case there was a verdict and judgment in his favor for $3,000. The defendant appeals.

The plaintiff’s own statement of his case is this: In September, 1927, the bridge company was erecting a bridge at Hazard. He went to the foreman and asked for a job, telling the foreman that he was over 16 years of age, because he knew that if he did not tell him this he could not get a job. The foreman employed him. He shoveled gravel, carried steel and water, carried cement, and did general work. He worked about three weeks. The cement was hauled on a truck from the railroad depot to the end of the bridge to the mixer. He was helping to unload the truck of the cement on the 20th day of October. They seemed to be in a rush, and in unloading the truck some one put two sacks of cement on his shoulder and he started to walk with- the cement, and, when he went a few steps, he felt something tear in the lower left side of his abdomen. The sacks weighed 100 pounds each. He had gone about two steps before he was injured. It was about eight steps to the mixer to which the cement was to be carried. That night blGod passed from him in considerable quantity. He was sick from the time of his injury and unable to do any more work. The blood continued to pass for some time then he got better, but it would pass again whenever he lifted anything or did any work. He was unable to state who put the sacks on his shoulder or who was present at the time. The work he was doing was the usual work done by the men at the truck, except that usually each person carried one sack of cement. He was born on January 15, 1912, and was not 16 years- of age when the trouble occurred.

The only testimony as to the permanency of his injury is this statement by his physician:

“Q. Assuming doctor that this man had the condition which you found and described to the jury and that since that time and Up to the present time when this man lifts or strains himself that blood still passes through him, but in much less quantity than when he was first injured, what would you as a medical man say? A. I would assume he had some permanent trouble that had not been recovered.”

*774 The plaintiff’s whole case rests on the ground that he was employed when he was under 16 years of age in violation of the statute. The material provisions of the statute are these:

“No child between fourteen and sixteen years of age shall be employed, permitted or suffered to work in or in connection with any factory, mill, workshop, mercantile establishment, store, office, printing-establishment, bakery, laundry, restaurant, hotel, apartment house, theatre, motion picture establishment, or in the distribution nor transmission of merchandise or messages, unless the person, firm or corporation employing him procures from the local school authorities and keeps on file and accessible to the truant officers and to the labor inspectors, an employment certificáis as hereinafter prescribed, and keeps two complete lists of all such children employed therein, one on file and one conspicuously posted near the principal entrance of the building-in which such children are employed. On the termination of the employment of a child so registered, and whose certificate is so filed, such certificate shall be returned by the employer to the officer by whom it was issued within two days of the termination of the employment of such child. A labor inspector may make demand on an employer in whose establishment a child apparently under the age of sixteen years is employed or permitted or suffered to work and whose employment certificate is not then filed as required by this act, that such employer shall either furnish him, within ten days, evidence satisfactory to him that such child is in fact sixteen years of age or over, or shall cease to employ, or permit, or suffer such child to work therein. A labor inspector may require from such employer the same evidence of age of such child as is required for the issuance of an employment certificate, and the employer furnishing such evidence shall not be required to furnish any further evidence of the age of the child. In case such employer shall fail to produce and deliver to the labor inspector, within ten days after such demand such evidence of the age therein required of him, and thereafter continue to employ such child, or permit, or suffer such child to work in such establishment, proof of the giving of such notice and of such failure to produce and file such, *775 evidence shall be prima facie evidence in any prosecution brought for violation of the provision that such child is under sixteen years of age and is unlawfully employed.” Ky. Stats., sec. 33la2.
“Truant officers may visit mines, factories, mills, workshops, mercantile establishments, stores, offices, printing establishments, . . . hotels, apartment houses, theatres and motion picture establishments, in their several towns and cities and ascertain whether any minors are employed therein contrary to the provisions of this act, and they shall report any cases of such illegal employment to the superintendent of schools and to the labor inspector, or other authorized officer of the state. Labor inspectors and truant officers may require that the employment certificates and lists, provided for in this act, of minors employed in such establishments shall be produced for their inspection. Complaints for offenses under this act, except as to the employment of children in mines, shall be brought by the labor inspector. The provisions of this act with regard to the employment of children in mines shall be enforced by the state inspector of mines and his assistants, who shall bring all complaints for violation of the same.” Ky. Stats., sec. 331a8.
“No child under the age of sixteen years shall be employed, permitted or suffered (1) to sew or assist in sewing belts in any capacity whatever; (2) nor to adjust any belt to any machinery; (3) nor to oil, wipe or clean machinery; (4) nor to operate or to assist in operating any of the following named machines: (a) circular or band saws; (b) wood shapers; (c) wood joiners; (d) planers; (e) sandpaper or wood polishing machinery; (f) emery or polishing wheels used for polishing sheet metals; (g) wood turning or boring machinery; (h) picker machines or machines used in picking wool, cotton, hair or other materials; (i) carding machines; (j) paper-lace machines; (k) lyeather burnishing machines; (1) job or cylinder printing presses operated by other power than foot power; (m) boring or drill presses; (n) stamping machines used in sheet metal and tinware or' in paper and leather manufacturing, or in washer and nut factories; (o) metal or paper cutting machines; (p) corner staying machines in paper box factories; (q) corrugating rolls such as *776

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

Related

Gillikin v. Burbage
139 S.E.2d 753 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1965)
Potter v. Davidson
21 P.2d 785 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1933)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
22 S.W.2d 300, 231 Ky. 772, 1929 Ky. LEXIS 374, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vincennes-bridge-co-v-guinns-guardian-kyctapphigh-1929.