#### Thomas Hart, Appellee, v. Scully Steel & Iron Company, Appellant,

Gen. No. 18,951.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Master and servant, § 176 * —methods of work. In an action for personal injuries to an employe it was shown that a wagon-*211load of steel plates, forty feet long, eight inches wide and a quarter of an inch thick, was brought to a railroad station to be loaded on a gondola car; that the entire load was lifted on the car at one time by means of a derrick; that it then became necessary to remove the angle irons on which the load rested while on the wagon from underneath the plates on the car, plaintiff claiming that the usual method was by lifting the plates by means of the derrick, and that while placing a chain around the plates for that purpose the foreman took it away from him, fastened it to the angle irons and immediately signalled the derrick man to hoist, and before plaintiff could get to a place of safety he was crushed against the side of the car by the angle irons. Defendant contended that the method adopted was the usual method for removing the angle irons in such cases. Held, that a verdict for plaintiff was not manifestly against the weight of evidence.

*210Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Charles M. Foell, Judge, presiding.

Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the October term, 1912.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed February 17, 1914.

Rehearing denied March 3, 1914.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Thomas Hart against Scully Steel & Iron Company, a corporation, for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff while in its employ due to the alleged negligence of defendant’s foreman in doing work in an unsafe manner. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

Frank M. Cox and E. J. Fellingham, for appellant; Frank T. Winslow, of counsel.

.Tames C. McShane, for appellee.

*

gpe Illinois Notes Digest, Vuls. XI to- Ny, game topic and section number,

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, same topic and section number.

Mr. Justice Clark

delivered the opinion of the court.

*2112. Master and servant, § 242 * —toorlcing foreman as fellow-servant. Where the method of doing the work adopted by the foreman is unsafe, resulting in injury to an employe, the fact that the foreman participated in the work did not difest him of the character of foreman or vice principal and render him a fellow-servant.