DocketNumber: Nos. 18,846-(101)
Citation Numbers: 127 Minn. 507
Judges: Dibell
Filed Date: 12/18/1914
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 9/9/2022
Appeal by the defendant from an order denying its alternative motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new tria] after a verdict for the plaintiff in an action to recover for personal injuries sustained while in the employ of the defendant.
The plaintiff was injured while working for the defendant on a hand jointer at Grand Crossing, in Wisconsin. Two acts of negli
“All hand jointers must be equipped with safety cylinder heads and a guard must be placed over the knives to protect the hands of the operator.”
It defined “guarded” as follows':
“The term ‘guarded’ when used in these orders shall mean so covered, fenced or inclosed that a person in the course of his employment is not liable to come in contact with the point of danger and be injured.”
The defendant complied so far as to furnish safety cylinder heads. It did not place a guard over the knives. There is evidence that it was practicable to do so. There is evidence that a guard of some kind had at one time been over the knives. There was evidence that it was impracticable. There was testimony on the part of the defendant that guards could not be placed over the knives without destroying the character of the machine as a jointer. The court submitted the case to the jury substantially upon the theory that the defendant was liable only in the event that it was practicable to place a guard over the knives; and that it negligently failed so to place guards. Upon the theory upon which the case was submitted the questions of practicability and negligence were for the jury.
Order affirmed.