212 N.C. 98

MACK WILEY v. NANCY E. OLMSTED and VICTOR OLMSTED.

(Filed 22 September, 1937.)

*99 Moody & Moody and J. D. Malonee for plaintiff.

Gray & Christopher for defendants.

Pee Cubiam.

Conceding without deciding that at the trial of this action there was evidence tending to show that at the time he was injured plaintiff was at work as an employee of the defendants, as contended by the plaintiff, and not as an independent contractor, as contended by the defendants (see Embler v. Lumber Co., 167 N. C., 457, 83 S. E., 740), we are of the opinion that there was no evidence tending to show that plaintiff was injured by the negligence of the defendants, or of either of them, as contended by the plaintiff. All the evidence shows that plaintiff’s injuries were the result of an unavoidable accident, for which neither of the defendants was responsible.

At the time he was injured the plaintiff was about 64 years of age. He was an experienced well-digger. He requested his helpers to lower him into the well which he was digging for the defendant by means of a block and tackle, in order that he might adjust a section of terra cotta piping which he had caused to be placed in the bottom of the well to prevent the walls of the well from falling in. While he was being lowered into the well, at the suggestion of the defendant Victor Olmsted, he took his foot out of a hook and placed it on a block. As he did this his hand, by which he was holding a rope, slipped. His foot slipped from the block, with the result that he fell to the bottom of the well, striking the terra cotta pipe. His injuries were painful, and probably permanent, but were not caused by the negligence of the defendants, or of either of them.

The judgment dismissing the action is

Affirmed.

Wiley v. Olmsted
212 N.C. 98

Case Details

Name
Wiley v. Olmsted
Decision Date
Sep 22, 1937
Citations

212 N.C. 98

Jurisdiction
North Carolina

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!