Harkins v. Veness Lumber Co.

Citations

• 69 Wash. 196
• 124 P. 492
• 1912 Wash. LEXIS 871

Syllabus

<p>Master and Servant—Injuries—Assumption of Risks. An operator of a saw assumes the risk of dangers from the fact that no’ adequate means had been provided for stopping the saw when slivers should become lodged in it, as the defect was open and obvious; and also of the dangers incident to sawing cants cut from top logs, by reason of the greater prevalence of splinters in top logs, he having had notice of such fact without special warning thereof.</p> <p>Same—Contributory Negligence—Question for Jury. Upon a dispute in the evidence as to whether a special warning should have been given to a sawyer of the danger from attempting to remove wedged splinters with his hands, the question of his contributory negligence in so doing is for the jury.</p> <p>Same—Choice of Methods. In such a case, he is not guilty of contributory negligence in not adopting the safe way by having the mill shut down, when no method had been provided for his stopping the mill without leaving his post, and it is doubtful if that method of removing slivers was contemplated.</p> <p>Same—Unsafe Methods of Work—Knowledge. A sawyer is not chargeable with knowledge that the removal of wedged splinters with the hands is unsafe merely because he may know of other safe ways of doing it.</p> <p>Trial—Instructions—Assumption of Facts. A requested in-' struction assuming facts as proven which, were for the jury is properly refused.</p>