Rickel v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.

Citations

• 104 Kan. 453
• 179 P. 550
• 1919 Kan. LEXIS 288

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Corporation — Acts of Corporate Officer — Electing Not to Come Under Compensation Act — Burden of Proof. When an officer of a corporation presents to the secretary of state a document in writing in which it is recited that such corporation elects not to come under the provisions of the workmen’s compensation act, and the secretary of state accepts and files such document as a genuine and authorized instrument, the public has a right to act upon the presumption that the execution and presentation of the document were authorized by the corporation, and if not so authorized the burden is on the corporation to prove that fact.</p> <p>2. Same — Dangerous Place to Work — Assumption of Bisk — Instructions. Where a jury specifically finds that the situation of a workman who was injured was not obviously dangerous, an inaccurate instruction touching the workman’s assumption of the risk of obvious dangers is not reversible error.</p> <p>3. Same — Negligence — Moving Heavy Machinery — Tools Required — Province of Jury — Matters of Common Knowledge. A jury may draw upon their own information, without proof, touching simple matters of common knowledge and experience, and they do not need to be told that the use of a jack (or other equally efficient device) is necessary to raise the wheels of a heavily loaded vehicle from, a groove or rut into which the wheels had slipped; and when all the facts touching such a situation are in evidence the jury may properly find that the attempt to drag the loaded vehicle out of the groove without the use of jacks was an act of negligence; and a finding that such negligence caused the injury and death of a workman will not be disturbed.</p>