West v. Jesse A. Linney & Co.
Before: Conrey
Synopsis
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
CONREY, P. J.
In this action it was alleged by the plaintiff that he was employed by the defendants as a house painter upon a certain house in the city of Los Angeles; that while working in the course of that employment upon a
[165]
scaffold supplied and erected by defendants and suspended by ropes and hooks from the building, the scaffold suddenly and without warning and through the negligence of the defendants, fell and precipitated plaintiff to the ground below whereby he received the described injuries. It was pleaded that the negligence of the defendants consisted in failure to provide plaintiff a secure and sufficient scaffold upon which to work, and proper and sufficient supports for said scaffold. Defendants appeal from the judgment and from an order denying their motion for a new trial.
It is conceded that the ropes, hooks, jacks, and platform constituting the scaffold were supplied by the defendants to the plaintiff and two other workmen who were co-operating with him as fellow-workmen in painting the house. It was also shown without conflict in the - evidence that the scaffold fell suddenly and without'warning, and thereby the plaintiff received his injuries. The scaffold was erected by workmen of the defendants who put the materials in place and swung the platform into the position where it was when it fell. It was clearly shown by the evidence, and is not disputed, that the scaffold was of a kind commonly used and well approved .in the painting business, and that the particular materials were superior of their kind and in first-class condition. The method of erecting the scaffold was as follows: The ropes were hung from hooks which were fastened to roof jacks which rested upon the shingles of the roof. The upper end of each jack was thrust under an upper course of shingles, and the jacks were prevented from slipping by certain rows of screws the points of which were arranged so as to catch upon the shingles of the roof. Two shingles at the lower side of the roof, and upon which one of the jacks rested, slipped out of place and fell to the ground. At the same instant the jack and hook slipped off, thereby causing the rope and platform to fall.
In his testimony the plaintiff described the staging and the materials by which it was upheld, and stated that when the staging was put up he tested the falls by swinging upon each of the ropes attached to two of the hooks “before we put the scaffolding on.” Lee Wilson, a witness for the defendants, was one of the men working with the plaintiff. Wilson testified that, with the assistance of one Doremus, he placed the hooks on the roof and tested them; that he waited at each
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)