Canton Cotton Warehouse Co. v. Pool
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the circuit court of Madison county. Hon. Robert Powell, Judge. Pool, the appellee, was the plaintiff, and the Canton Cotton Warehouse Co., the appellant, was the defendant in the court below. The action was for personal injuries received by the plaintiff, resulting from jumping out of a house because of his having been frightened by the defendant’s servants. The defendant was engaged in manufacturing ice. Its plant was being operated at night, lighted with electricity.
Read the full summary
From the circuit court of Madison county. Hon. Robert Powell, Judge. Pool, the appellee, was the plaintiff, and the Canton Cotton Warehouse Co., the appellant, was the defendant in the court below. The action was for personal injuries received by the plaintiff, resulting from jumping out of a house because of his having been frightened by the defendant’s servants. The defendant was engaged in manufacturing ice. Its plant was being operated at night, lighted with electricity. The plaintiff, a country boy, with two companions, also rural youths, were wandering over the town of Canton, seeing…
1Opinion of the CourtWhitfield, C. J.
The act done here was not the act of the master. It was not done in the master’s business, but was an enterprise wholly disconnected therefrom, done exclusively on their own account-by the employes, for the highly reprehensible purpose of .playing a practical joke. It very clearly appears that though the implements used were those of the company, used in certain ways in the making of ice, they were in this act not used as they would be in the making of ice. The slamming of the coal scoop on the iron stairs, and the shutting off of steam, usually self-regulating by the automatic air pump, the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ritchie v. WallerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1893
- Rounds v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Bowler v. O'ConnellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
- Richberger v. American Express Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1895
- Illinois Central Railroad v. LathamMississippi Supreme Court · 1894
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Barmore v. Vicksburg, Shreveport & Pacific Railway Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1904
- Gulledge v. ShawMississippi Supreme Court · 2004
- Adams v. Cinemark USA, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 2002
- Mabus v. St. James Episcopal ChurchMississippi Supreme Court · 2004
- Holliday v. Pizza Inn, Inc.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1995
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.