Skip to main content
· 6/5/1891

Smith v. Belshaw

Citations

  • 89 Cal. 427
  • 26 P. 834
  • 1891 Cal. LEXIS 831

Syllabus

<p>Appeal—Review of Evidence—Support of Verdict.—Although the appellate court will not disturb the verdict of a jury where the evidence is conflicting upon substantial matters, yet where the verdict does not have some meritorious support from the evidence, it will be set aside and disregarded.</p> <p>Negligence — Employer and Contractor — Control of Work. — Where one carries on an independent employment in pursuance of a contract, by which he has entire control of the work and the manner of its performance, his employer is not liable for any negligence of which he may be guilty in the course of his employment.</p> <p>Id.—Leaving Coal Mine without Support — Injury to Laborer — Negligence of Contractor — Working Min-e for Royalty — Liability of Owner. — In an action to recover damages for negligence in suffering the roof of a drift in a coal mine to remain without support, by reason whereof a portion of the roof fell upon and injured the plaintiff, who was a laborer in the mine, where it appears that at the time of the accident, and for some months prior thereto, the mine was in the exclusive possession and control of a third party, under a contract with the owner, and that under the terms of the contract the contractor employed and paid the workmen, and had entire charge of and authority over the mine, receiving a certain royalty for the coal taken from the mine, the owner is not liable for the alleged negligence.</p> <p>Id. — Payment fob Labor at Store of Owner — Belief of Miners as to Employer — Terms of Contract. —The fact that the miners were paid their wages at the store of the owner of the mine, where they had been paid prior to his contract with the party in possession, and that some of the miners thought they were working for the owner, is not sufficient to defeat express and uncontradicted testimony as to the terms of the contract and the labor performed under it. What the miners thought as to who was their employer is immaterial.</p> <p>Id. — Gist of Action

Judges: Garoutte

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.