Dickson v. Southern California Edison Co.

DRAPEAU, J.

Plaintiff in this ease was a journeyman lineman. He suffered injuries when a pole-carrying truck he was unloading suddenly moved backwards downhill. He secured a jury’s verdict for $17,000, against the owner of the truck, Southern California Edison Company.

Plaintiff was employed by Stone and Webster Engineering Company. It was his duty to drive and to unload the truck. Some 20 months before the accident the truck had been rented by Stone and Webster from Edison Company.

Edison made repairs to the truck before it was delivered to Stone and Webster, and checked the brakes and gears. The agreement of hiring provided that Edison was to make major repairs to the track if necessary. But from the time Stone and Webster took it over, their mechanics took care of the truck.

On the day of the accident plaintiff parked the truck on a steep hill. It was held in place by wooden blocks placed under its wheels, and by electric brakes on a dolly attached to the truck. The truck motor was kept running to operate the brakes on the dolly.

After plaintiff had been unloading poles for about an hour the truck suddenly went backwards down the hill, causing

[87]

a pole on the truck to shift, pinning plaintiff behind the truck cab. He suffered a compound fracture of the left leg, bruises, abrasions, and shock. He was unable to work full time for 11 months, and he suffered a permanent impairment of his leg.

Edison Company appeals from the judgment, upon the ground principally that the truck was in the sole possession and under the exclusive control of Stone and Webster at the time of the accident, and that there was no duty owing to plaintiff by Edison Company.

Edison urges other grounds of appeal: that plaintiff assumed the risk, that he was guilty of contributory negligence, and that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict ; also that there was error in giving and refusing certain instructions.

Having come to the conclusion that the first ground of appeal compels a reversal of the judgment, the other grounds have not been considered.