Johnson v. Far West Lumber Co.

Citations

• 47 Wash. 492
• 92 P. 274
• 1907 Wash. LEXIS 794

Syllabus

<p>Master and Servant—Injuries—Guarding Machinery—Factory Act. A master cannot escape liability from failing to guard dangerous machinery from the fact that a proper safeguard had been provided hut was temporarily removed, where it was not the plaintiff’s duty to see that the same was adjusted.</p> <p>Same—Unguarded Machines—Assumption op Risk. An employee does not assume the risk from the failure of the master to guard machinery as required by the factory act.</p> <p>Same — Unguarded Machines — Contributory Negligence. An employee who works about machinery after having notice that it is not guarded as required by the factory act, the risk of which condition he does not assume, is not thereby guilty of contributory negligence, nor precluded from a recovery unless the injury is caused by a negligent act of his own, and not alone by the dangers of his situation.</p> <p>Same. An operator of a sticker who, in reaching up for a strap, raises his foot, so that it comes in contact with an unguarded saw under the table, is not thereby guilty of contributory negligence, as a matter of law.</p> <p>Same—Vebdict in Pavor oe Coemployee as Discharge oe Master. Where a master and his superintendent are jointly sued for negligence in failing to guard dangerous machinery as required by the factory act, a separate verdict in favor of the superintendent does not discharge the master or preclude a verdict against him, since the statute imposes the imperative duty upon the master and not upon the superintendent.</p>