Smith v. Hecla Mining Co.

Citations

• 38 Wash. 454
• 80 P. 779
• 1905 Wash. LEXIS 1192

Syllabus

<p>Master and Servant—Negligence—Injury to Miner—Duty of Inspecting Place—Evidence of Custom and Rules in Other Mines. In an action by a “mucker” employed in removing rock and debris thrown down by the miners, for injuries sustained through the fall of overhanging rock in a mine, it is incompetent and prejudicial error to receive evidence of the rules or methods of work in other mines in the locality respecting the duties of a “mucker” with reference to inspection and testing the ground for safety, where the witness did not know anything about the rules or methods of work in the mine in question (Dunbar, X, dissenting).</p> <p>Same—Safe Place—Pall of Overhanging Rock—Duty of Master and Servant—Instructions. In an action for injuries sustained through the fall of overhanging rock in a mine, brought by a “mucker,” who was employed in removing rock and debris tnrown down by the miners in blasting, at a point where there was a distance of 30 or 35 feet between the last section of timbers and the face of the workings, and who knew that overhead rock, when left for a few days, was liable to “air-slack” and fall, it is error to instruct the jury that the law does not under any circumstances exact from the servant any diligence in ascertaining defects not apparent to his observation, and that he has a right to assume without inquiry or investigation that his master has discharged the duty of furnishing him a safe place in which to work; since the “safe place” rule applies in such a case only in a qualified sense, and the conditions of danger imposing the duty of inspection by the master impose a corresponding duty upon thd servant to use his faculties and exercise diligence in ascertaining the condition of his surroundings, and he cannot absolutely assume such a mining place to be a safe place (Dunbar, X, dissenting) .</p>