Beckman v. Anheuser-Busch Brewing Ass'n
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Jackson Circnit Court.— Ron. J. IS. Slover, Judge. STATEMENT BY BROADDITS, J.' The plaintiff in this case, Charles H. Beckman, is a young man nineteen years of age, and for more than five years prior to the injuries complained of had worked for the defendant at its place of business at the northeast comer of Twentieth and Walnut streets in Kansas City, Missouri.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jackson Circnit Court.— Ron. J. IS. Slover, Judge. STATEMENT BY BROADDITS, J.' The plaintiff in this case, Charles H. Beckman, is a young man nineteen years of age, and for more than five years prior to the injuries complained of had worked for the defendant at its place of business at the northeast comer of Twentieth and Walnut streets in Kansas City, Missouri. The defendant during said time carried on the business of bottling and distributing its beer in said city, and maintained, among others, a bottling department. This department was located in one building, and to’ the east…
1Opinion of the CourtBroaddus, J.
Defendant insists that under the evidence plaintiff was not entitled to recover; and that is the only question presented for our determination. It will be perceived that there can be no complaint as to the sufficiency of the skid itself, but the ground upon which plaintiff seeks to recover is, that It was not properly secured, in which respect defendant failed in its duty to its employees.
A skid is a simple contrivance used for handling heavy articles under many conditions and was especially adapted for the work plaintiff was performing *560when he was injured. Every person of ordinary…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Huhn v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- Bradley v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Blanton v. DolbSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- O'Mellia v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Minnier v. Sedalia, Warsaw & Southwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1902
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Glasscock v. Swafford Bros. Dry Goods Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1904
- Modlagl v. Kaysing Iron & Foundry Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1913
- Braden v. Friedrichsen Floor & Wall Tile Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1929
- Erwin v. Missouri & Kansas Telephone Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- Courter v. TootleMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.