
    Isaac Teetsel, Respondent, v. William H. Simmons, Clarence E. Dunham, Charles Mulford and James Williamson, Appellants.
    Judgment reversed and a new trial granted, coste to abide the event.
    Mem. by Herrick, J.; Putnam, J., dissenting.—
   Herrick, J.:

It seems to me that the evidence in this case establishes that the switchboard, upon which the plaintiff was standing at the time of the accident, was placed there to be used for the purposes of a switchboard Only, and not as a part of a passageway for the workmen of one room, or part, of the icehouse to the other; that its occasional use as a passageway by some of the workmen was not in pursuance of any custom or by any authority of the defendants; that the board was reasonably sufficient for the purpose for which, it was intended it should be used, that is, as a switchboard; that the accident happened by reason of the careless act of a fellow-servant while not in the performance of any duty necessary to be performed in the course of his employment. It follows from these conclusions that the judgment should be reversed. Judgment reversed and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event.

Mayham, P. J., concurred.

Putnam, J.

(dissenting): While not very clear about this case it seems to me it was properly submitted to the jury. The admission of defendant Simmons, the statement of defendants’ witness, Bumery, which tended to show that plaintiff was properly on the board, and other evidence in the case, I think, allowed the judge to submit the case to the jury.  