Meshishnek v. Seattle Sand & Gravel Co.

Citations

• 51 Wash. 382
• 99 P. 9
• 1909 Wash. LEXIS 1197

Syllabus

<p>Master and Servant — Pleading—Issues and Proof — Assumption of Risks — Knowledge of Defect — Promise to Repair. An action for personal injuries sustained by reason of a defective gasoline engine, which the master had promised to repair, does not fail upon withdrawal of issues relating to the promise, where it is alleged and shown that defendant did not know of the danger, although he did know of the defect, and that the defect was the proximate cause of the injury, and the defect was not so serious that the engine could not be used with care.</p> <p>Same — Defective Machinery — Assumption of Risks — Contributory Negligence — Question for Jury. In an action for injuries sustained by an operator of a gasoline engine, the plaintiff’s assumption of risks and contributory negligence are for the jury,, where it appears 'that plaintiff was employed to operate a steam engine, but at defendant’s request undertook to operate a gasoline engine with which he had no experience and which was defective, that he operated it five or six weeks, starting it in the way he was instructed to do, whereby a spark set fire to oil that, had been spilled by another employee without plaintiff’s knowledge, causing an explosion of gasoline near an exhaust pipe, the plaintiff testifying that he knew of the defects in the engine but did not know of the danger.</p>