Diehl v. Lehigh Iron Co.

Citations

• 140 Pa. 487
• 21 A. 430
• 1891 Pa. LEXIS 862

Syllabus

<p>1. A servant who voluntarily undertakes a perilous employment, the dangerous character of which he is acquainted with or has the opportunity to learn, assumes the risks naturally and reasonably incident thereto, even though he undertakes to perform the hazardous duty because urged to do so by the master.</p> <p>(а) The plaintiff was employed by the defendant to blast out “salamander” from the bottom of an iron-furnace, and directed to use dynamite in the blasting. On his complaining to the defendant’s superintendent that the salamander was too hot to work in, the latter told him that it was not too hot, and that the work must be done.</p> <p>(б) The plaintiif then drilled a hole in the salamander, and, in the superintendent’s absence and knowing that the hole was red-hot at the bottom, inserted a dynamite cartridge, which almost instantly exploded, injuring him. The superintendent had not directed dynamite to be put into that hole, or into any other presenting similar conditions :</p> <p>2. The evidence showing that the plaintiff had had opportunities to become acquainted with the explosive character of such cartridges, under the influence of heat, and knew the danger he was encountering, he alone assumed the risk of inserting the blast, in the conditions existing at the time, and was not entitled to recover for his injuries.</p>