Heavey v. Leavenworth Terminal Railway & Bridge Co.

Citations

• 97 Kan. 737
• 156 P. 699
• 1916 Kan. LEXIS 388

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Drawbridge — Negligence of Superintendent — Injury to Employee— Petition — Evidence. In an action for damages for personal injury sustained in opening the draw span of a bridge across a navigable river, an allegation of the petition that the bridge was not sufficiently open to permit the passage of a boat when the signal was given to the boat pass through is supported by evidence tending to prove that the draw was opened by levers and keys operated by hand, that when the draw was open at an angle of about forty-five degrees the defendant’s foreman signaled the boat to pass through, that the boat then started through, that the foreman then signaled the plaintiff with the other workmen to close the bridge, that they started to do so, that the boat started to drift, that the bridge was not opened wide enough to permit the boat to pass through, that the foreman then gave a signal to open the draw wider, that this signal came too late, and that the boat struck the end of the draw span, causing the levers and keys to revolve rapidly, thereby injuring the plaintiff.</p> <p>2. Same — Drawbridge Not Sufficiently Open — Proximate Cause. Under such circumstances, the finding of the jury that the negligence of the defendant in not having the bridge sufficiently open was the cause of the plaintiff’s injury shows that the negligence alleged was the proximate cause of the injury.</p> <p>3. Same — Instructions—Dangerous Employment. Under such circumstances, it was not error to give instructions concerning dangerous employment.</p>