Milner Hotels v. Spangler

Full title: MILNER HOTELS, INC. v. NORMAN SPANGLER, ETC

Court: Supreme Court of Colorado. En Banc

Date published: Feb 10, 1958

321 P.2d 625 (Colo. 1958)

321 P.2d 625

Opinion

No. 18,143.

Decided February 10, 1958.

Action against Hotel and another to recover damages resulting from flooding of plaintiff's store. Judgment for plaintiff.

Affirmed.

1. MASTER AND SERVANT — Negligence of Servant — Liability of Master — Scope of Employment. Where the testimony produced by plaintiff was sufficient to establish a prima facie showing that a person undertaking to make plumbing repairs on a hotel property, was at the time an employee of the hotel and acting within the scope of his employment, and no evidence was offered by defendant to rebut such testimony, a judgment for plaintiff based thereon was not error.

Error to the District Court of Pueblo County, Hon. John H. Marsalis, Judge.

Mr. CHARLES S. VIGIL, for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. LATTIMER, CRADDOCK ROBB, for defendant in error.

MR. JUSTICE KNAUSS delivered the opinion of the Court.

PLAINTIFF in error was one of two defendants in the trial court and we will refer to the parties as plaintiff and defendant, or by name.

The action was brought by plaintiff to recover damages from Milner Hotels, Inc., and E. M. Williams, allegedly an employee of the hotel, arising out of the negligence of said Williams in undertaking to make plumbing repairs in a room of Milner Hotels, Inc., directly above the storeroom operated by plaintiff. His efforts resulted in a break in a water pipe, with the consequent flooding of plaintiff's premises. Trial was to the court and resulted in a judgment in favor of plaintiff, and Milner Hotels, inc., is here on writ of error seeking reversal.

Reversal is sought on two grounds: (1) "That there was no proper proof, if any, in the action to show that Williams was a servant of the Milner Hotels, Inc., and (2) There was no proof to indicate that, even if he was a servant, he was acting within the scope of his employment."

We are satisfied that the evidence offered by plaintiff was sufficient to establish a prima facie showing that Williams was an employee of Milner Hotels, Inc., and that in making the plumbing repairs he was acting within the scope of his employment. It would serve no useful purpose to review in detail the evidence offered by plaintiff, it being sufficient to note that no evidence was offered by defendant Milner Hotels, Inc., to rebut the evidence offered in support of plaintiff's complaint.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.