From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Webb v. D.O. Haynes Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 1, 1902
75 App. Div. 620 (N.Y. App. Div. 1902)

Opinion

October Term, 1902.


Judgment affirmed, with costs.


This is a judgment of nonsuit, and the plaintiff is entitled to the most favorable inferences which may be drawn from the evidence, but this liberal rule does not open the way to a reversal of the judgment. Plaintiff's intestate was killed while operating an elevator for the defendant. The theory of the plaintiff is that her intestate was killed because of the fact that he was put at work running an elevator for which he had not been properly prepared by instructors, but the evidence does not show that he was not adequately instructed in the operation of a comparatively simple piece of machinery, or that his death was due in any measure to his lack of knowledge in this respect. All that is known is that after operating the elevator for a period of about one week some of his fellow employees heard a cry or a groan, and on running to the elevator found him crushed between the floor and the car of the elevator, the injuries resulting in his death. No one saw the accident, and plaintiff's intestate lived only to say in answer to the question how it happened, that he did not know. There was no evidence that the elevator was defective or out of repair, and there were no facts or circumstances developed by the evidence from which an inference could be drawn that the deceased was free from contributory negligence, or that the accident was a result of any alleged lack of instruction. On the contrary, the plaintiff's own witnesses testify that the deceased was given instruction in the management of the elevator by a competent engineer and by a fellow-employee who was accustomed to the operation of machinery, and it was not disputed that where the elevator was managed in the manner pointed out by these instructors it was perfectly in the control of the operator. The case is one which is nearly analogous with that of Palcheski v. Brooklyn Heights R.R. Co. ( 69 App. Div. 440), and it would have been entirely improper to permit the jury to speculate upon the matters which might have been suggested, but which were not proved by the evidence. The judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs. All concurred.


Summaries of

Webb v. D.O. Haynes Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 1, 1902
75 App. Div. 620 (N.Y. App. Div. 1902)
Case details for

Webb v. D.O. Haynes Co.

Case Details

Full title:Carrie L. Webb, as Administratrix, etc., of Robert H. Webb, Deceased…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 1, 1902

Citations

75 App. Div. 620 (N.Y. App. Div. 1902)
78 N.Y.S. 95