Anderson

Anderson v. Hinshaw

Good Law
110 Cal. 682·1896 Cal. LEXIS 534·43 P. 389
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 11, 1896No. 16020California1,387 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Haynes, J.

Appeal by defendant from the judgment and an order denying his motion for a new trial. This action was brought to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained through the negligence of the defendant. A jury trial was had, and a verdict returned for the plaintiff, assessing his damages at one thousand dollars. Appellant contends for a reversal principally upon the ground that the evidence is insufficient to justify the verdict.

The plaintiff was employed by the defendant as a farm hand, and, whilst so employed, he ascended a derrick mast, used in hoisting hay, for the purpose of adjusting a block and tackle; while so engaged the mast fell, as plaintiff alleges and contends, through the careless and improper interference by the defendant and his foreman with the guy ropes by which the mast was kept in position, the fall resulting in breaking defendant’s leg above the knee.

The evidence is far from satisfactory as to the imme *684 diate cause of the fall of the mast. At the time the plaintiff ascended the mast it was supported by two guy ropes, a third rope hanging loose from the top of the mast. Mr. Albert, the defendant’s foreman, directed the plaintiff to…

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.