Silveira

Silveira v. Iverson

Good Law
125 Cal. 266·1899 Cal. LEXIS 844·57 P. 996
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 30, 1899S. F. No. 1153California793 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McFarland, J.

Appeal by defendants from a judgment in favor of plaintiff. Defendants did not interpose any demurrer, hut the main point which they now make for a reversal is that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

It is averred in the complaint that plaintiff was employed by defendants, who were the owners of a certain coasting schooner called the “Ocean Spray,” to cook on said schooner and to perform such other services as the captain of the vessel might call on him to perform; that “it was the duty of the defendants to provide said schooner with good, safe, and strong ropes, tackle, and sailing apparatus, hut that the defendants, disregarding their duty in that behalf, provided and used an old, worn-out, rotten, and defective reefing pennant, with which to reef the mainsail; of which they had notice”; that on a certain named day, “while plaintiff, in obedience to the orders of the captain of the said schooner, was assisting in reefing the mainsail in the *269 usual and proper way, by pulling at the reefing pennant in the usual and proper way, the said reefing pennant broke”; that when the pennant broke plaintiff was upon the roof of the cabin,…

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.