Erickson

Erickson v. Pacific States Lumber Co.

Good Law
18 F.2d 513·1927 U.S. App. LEXIS 1996
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 28, 1927No. 4954California1,230 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Gilbert, J.

(after stating the facts as above). Concerning the alleged defect in the flywheel, the evidence is, in substance, the following: The wheel was 14 feet in diameter, and it carried a rim 28 inches in’width. It had been in use in the mill 16 years. It had been cast in two sections, and when it arrived from the foundry it was found that a spoke of one section had been broken at a point about 8 inches from the rim. That section was immediately returned to the foundry for repair. Repair was made by the process of brazing. At that time welding was not locally known as a method of repair, and brazing was the approved method. The testimony was undisputed that the mended spoke was properly inspected and tested. The wheel was installed in the mill, the two sections having been attached together by bolts inserted in lugs *514 made in the rim for that purpose, and it was continuously used and occasionally inspected up to thd time of the accident. A witness for the plaintiff testified that after the accident he found among the pieces of the broken wheel the spoke that had been brazed, and that the brazing had not penetrated the spoke, but that the original fracture could be seen, covered with…

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.