Wells v. Swift & Co.

Citations

• 90 Kan. 168
• 133 P. 732
• 1913 Kan. LEXIS 185

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>Personal Injuries — Rotary Boring Machine — -Lever Valve without Safety Device. In a personal-injury case the petition alleged that the plaintiff was injured by the unexpected start-ing up of a rotary motor, driven by compressed air, caused by the opening of a lever Valve in a double connection attached to a movable hose; the mechanism was described and negligence was charged in that the valve was defective. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff and found specially that the defendant’s negligence consisted in using a valve without a locking or. safety device, and that they did not know what caused the valve to open. Held:</p> <p>(1)-Averments of Petition Sufficiently Specific. Although the petition was attacked for indefiniteness with respect to the allegation of negligence, no substantial prejudice resulted to the defendant from the want of more specific averments.</p> <p>(2)- Plaintiff’s Conduct Not Fatal to Recovery. The fact that a screw valve was provided at another point by which the plaintiff could have cut off the compressed air is not fatal to his recovery, since to have used that valve would have cut the air off from another machine as well as from that which he was using.</p> <p>(3)-1 Findings of Jury Sufficiently Definite and Verdict Sustained. Although the jury were unable to say in what manner the valve was opened, their verdict is sustained on the ground that it was a fair question for their determination whether, under all the conditions shown, it was negligence to use a lever valve without a locking device, in a situation such that it might in various ways be accidently opened.</p> <p>(4)- Admission of Opinion Evidence — ■Not Sufficient Ground for Reversal. The admission of opinion evidence that the valve, when used in the situation described, was unsafe is not sufficient ground for the reversal of the judgment, even if erroneous, as it does not seem probable that, the verdict was affected by it, there having