Thornberry v. Old Judge Mining Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Jasper Circuit Court. — Hon. Hugh Dabbs, Judge. (1) Defendant was negligent in providing drills that would not bore holes large enough to properly receive the explosives which plaintiff was required to use, and plaintiff did not assume the risk arising from that negligence although he may have been cognizant of the increase of danger resulting from the undersize of the drills.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jasper Circuit Court. — Hon. Hugh Dabbs, Judge. (1) Defendant was negligent in providing drills that would not bore holes large enough to properly receive the explosives which plaintiff was required to use, and plaintiff did not assume the risk arising from that negligence although he may have been cognizant of the increase of danger resulting from the undersize of the drills. Dakan v. Mercantile Co., 197 Mo. 238; Cole v. Transit Co., 183 Mo. 91; Curtis v. McNair, 173 Mo. 280; Pauck v. Beef Co., 159 Mo. 477; Settle v. Railroad, 127 Mo. 342. (2) Plaintiff did not relieve or release…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
This action is to recover damages for personal injury received by plaintiff while employed in defendant’s service by reason of an explosion of dynamite. At the close of the evidence in plaintiff’s behalf the trial court sustained a' demurrer thereto and plaintiff took a nonsuit with leave to move to set it aside, which the court afterwards refused to do.
Plaintiff was engaged in mining for defendant and at the time of the explosion was engaged in pushing with a tamping bar a stick of dynamite combined with a fuse and cap into a drill hole. In order to make a proper explosion a cap is fastened…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Warner v. St. Louis & Meramec River RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
- Caudle v. KirkbrideMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906
3Cited by3 opinions
- Pippin v. Will F. Plummer Construction Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1915
- Morgan v. Temagami Mining Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- Hecimovich v. Winston-Dear Const. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928