Skip to main content
· 6/29/1895

Davis v. Pac. Power Co.

Citations

  • 107 Cal. 563
  • 40 P. 950
  • 1895 Cal. LEXIS 793

Syllabus

<p>Negligence—Unprotected Machinery—Dangerous Projections in Shaft—Injury to Employee of Tenant—Liability of Owner.— Where a corporation engaged in the business of leasing buildings for business purposes and furnishing steam power in connection therewith, after leasing the basement and first floor of its building, erected in the basement an iron shaft to transmit power to a new building, which shaft passed through the casing of the basement door and along one side of the basement stairs, and that portion of the shaft over the stairway was unprotected, and had upon its surface rough, jagged projections and sharp points varying from a sixteenth to an eighth of an inch in height, which were of a character calculated to make the shaft at that point dangerous and likely to catch clothing, and were not visible when the shaft was revolving, and the plaintiff, being unaware of the projections in the shaft, and being the employee of the lessee of the basement, went upon the basement steps to the glass doors leading to the basement, for the purpose of seeing thereby to remove some thorns from his hand, having no available light in the basement sufficient for that purpose, whereupon his clothing was caught in the projections of the revolving shaft, near the stairway, and his body and limbs, in consequence, were badly broken and injured upon the shaft; a verdict for the plaintiff for damages for the injury thus sustained will not be set aside upon appeal.</p> <p>Id.—Consent of Tenant to Erection of Shaft—Effect of Verdict— Sufferance—Right of Plaintiff.—Where the evidence is conflicting as to whether the tenant gave his consent to the erection of a shaft in the basement by the owner of the building, and the court instructed the jury that if the defendant erected and maintained the shaft with the consent of the defendant, the plaintiff, as the tenant’s employee, could not recover, the verdict must be regarded as negativing such consent, and the plaintiff, being at best a mere li

Judges: Fleet

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.