#### Phillips v. Quapaw Bath House Company.

4-7069

170 S. W. 2d 1001

Opinion delivered May 10, 1943.

Jay M. Rowland, for appellant.

■ Martin, Wootton & Martin, for appellee.

Griffin Smith, C. J.

The judgment (a jury having-been waived) absolved the Bath House Company of negligence, notwithstanding appellant’s shoulder was slightly cut when she came into contact with a piece of rusty tin — which, as she expressed it, ‘ ‘. . . was sticking out the edge of the door. ’ ’

*817Tbe court found that although in- different circumstances presence of the tin would have constituted negligence, proof was lacking that it had been in a position to cause danger a sufficient length of time to have been discovered by the defendant in the exercise of ordinary care. We cannot say this holding is not supported by substantial evidence.

Affirmed.