Quinn brought suit against Allen for damages. The court sustained a demurrer to the petition, and this” is the error assigned. The facts alleged in the petition are substantially as follows: Quinn was employed' as a painter,' by Allen, on a house which was in process of construction, the carpenter work thereon being done by day labor hired by Allen, and under his direction and supervision. The plaintiff had to go from one part
Disregarding the mére conclusions of the pleader, and considering only the facts set out and relied upon to constitute negligence, we think the allegations were insufficient to show liability of the master. On the contrary, the allegations, while fully exonerating the master, indicate verjr clearly culpable negligence on the part of the servant, causing the injuries complained of. The house was in process of construction. It was necessary to place the joists in position, in order to support the flooring; and it necessarily required some little time to brace and secure them so that
When a servant brings suit against his master for personal injuries, it is incumbent upon him to show not only negligence on the part of the master, as the proximate cause of the injuries, but due care on his own part; and it must also appear, by the allegations of the petition, that the servant injured did not know, and had not equal means of knowing, all that which is charged as negligence to the master, and, by the exercise of ordinary care, could not have known thereof. There was no error in sustaining the demurrer to the declaration. Civil Code, §2612; Ludd v. Wilkins, 118 Ga. 525; Daniel v. Forsyth, 106 Ga. 568.
Judgment affirmed.