Opinion
May, 1919.
Present — Jenks, P.J., Putnam, Blackmar, Kelly and Jaycox, JJ.
The contracting stevedores against whom is this judgment were taking cargo into the lower hold without having fully opened the between-deck hatch. Because the size of the suspended loads was comparatively small, a fore-and-aft hatchbeam, on each side of this opening, had been left in. The beam ends lay in sockets or slots without being made fast. A hook from an empty sling coming up, dislodged one of these beams, which fell upon plaintiff's intestate, a longshoreman working in the hold, under this hatch. The questions of defendants' duty as to such beams were properly left to the jury. ( Duggan v. Phelps, 82 App. Div. 509.) Although the intestate had himself that morning helped lift out the wooden hatch sections and may have been a co-servant with the riggers and winchmen who had hoisted out the iron hatchbeams, it was a non-delegable duty of defendants as employers to have this hatch reasonably safe for the men to work beneath. ( Hatton v. Hilton Bridge Construction Co., 42 App. Div. 398; affd., 167 N.Y. 590.) The court's refusals to charge as requested by defendants present no error. The judgment and order are, therefore, unanimously affirmed, with costs.