Ford Roofing Products Co. v. Illinois Smelting & Refining Co.

1 Citing case

  1. Goetz v. Hydraulic Press Brick Co.

    320 Mo. 586 (Mo. 1928)   Cited 19 times
    In Goetz v. Hydraulic Press Brick Co., 320 Mo. 586, 593, 9 S.W.2d 606, 608(4), 60 A.L.R. 1064, 1069, plaintiff-invitee saw a blacksmith cut off the point of a heated rock drill, and a piece of the hot metal hit the wall just over a box containing dynamite and fell, and after an interval of time, saw smoke coming from the dynamite box. Plaintiff, although having ample time to leave and knowing of the danger, was injured by the resultant explosion.

    (2) Even though the defendant's witnesses Trowbridge, Janssen and Miles testified, without direct contradiction on the plaintiff's part, that Janssen was operating the mine on August 17, 1920, under the alleged contract purporting to be dated July 7, 1919, nevertheless the plaintiff did not admit such to be the fact and did not admit the existence of the alleged contract. It was, therefore, a question of fact for the jury whether such alleged contract was in existence on August 17, 1920, and whether or not Janssen was operating the mine at such time thereunder. Gannon v. Gas Co., 145 Mo. 519; Hunter v. Pryor, 292 S.W. 1062; Barz v. Yeast Co., 271 S.W. 361; McCray Lumber Co. v. Standard Cons. Co., 285 S.W. 107; Ford v. Roofing Products Co., 285 S.W. 541; Allen v. Fidelity Ins. Co., 285 S.W. 765. (3) To be an independent contractor the person who attempts to contract as such must be competent and fit.