Weddle

Weddle v. Heath

Caution
1931 Cal. LEXIS 719·211 Cal. 445·295 P. 832
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 30, 1931Docket No. S.F. 13382.California3,449 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Preston, J.

This is an action for damages for personal injuries received by plaintiff by coming into contact with a rapidly moving endless belt running on revolving pulleys, a part of certain pumping machinery located on the lands of .defendant. Plaintiff had a verdict for $15,000, followed by judgment in said sum, from which defendant has appealed on a bill of exceptions.

The amended complaint is in six counts, all having for their basis the charge of negligence in that defendant failed to properly guard the said pumping machinery or, putting it in another form, that defendant failed to furnish a safe place in which plaintiff might perform his work in connection with the use of said pump for irrigation purposes. The first four causes of action set forth in the complaint count upon the relation of master and servant between defendant and plaintiff; the remaining counts rest upon the relation of invitor and invitee between the same parties. It will be observed that under the relation of employer and employee, the rule of damages and negligence is modified by the so-called Roseberry Act (Stats. 1911, p. 796), the first section of which, so far as here material, is as follows:

Under the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.