Root v. Cudahy Packing Co.

Citations

• 94 Kan. 339
• 147 P. 69
• 1915 Kan. LEXIS 96

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Personal Injuries — Fall of Elevator — Expert Evidence— Not Prejudicial Error. Testimony substantially in line with the former decision (88 Kan. 413, 129 Pac. 147) touching the actual operation and equipment of the elevator on which the injury was received, was introduced at length. Held, that a statement of an expert’s opinion as to the effect of-moisture upon the bull wheel was not materially prejudicial.</p> <p>2. Same — Evidence—Comparison of Merits of Different Kinds of Elevators' — Not Competent. The defendant offered to prove by a witness familiar with friction-hoist elevators . and also electric elevators in another packing house that the latter require more frequent repairs than the former, which offer was refused. The witness was permitted to explain in detail the working of friction-hoist elevators and the cause of their failure to work properly, and it was not error to exclude the offer to compare them with elevators of another kind.</p> <p>3. Samé — Instructions — Inaccurate Words Used ■— Not Prejudicial. The inaccurate or improper use of one or two words or expressions in an instruction is not material error when the entire instruction is not thereby rendered misleading.</p> <p>4. Same — Instruction—Relating Ho Amount of Recovery — Not Prejudicial. After charging as to the proper basis of re- . covery the court instructed the jury that they could not assess the plaintiff’s damages in a greater amount than the sum claimed in the petition. Held, that this can not properly be regarded as a hint that a verdict for the full amount would be approved.</p> <p>5. Same — Refusal of a Request for a Proper Instruction — Not so Prejudicial as to Justify a Reversal. While a requested instruction that any single defective or imperfect operation of the elevator would not of itself be sufficient evidence nor any evidence of any previous notice or knowledge of any defect or insufficiency was proper and should have been given, as the j