Court Opinion

ID: 9696411
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 18:47:05.038423+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:22.056411
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Jones:
The court below entered a judgment on the pleadings against Roy Earns in his individual capacity. The rationale of its ruling was that, on the face of the *185pleadings, Roy Earns was guilty of contributory negligence. With that conclusion I agree.
Bearing in mind that only in clear cases should judgment on the pleadings be entered, nevertheless, it appears to me that the entry of the instant judgment as to Roy Earns, the adult plaintiff, was proper.
No citation of authority is necessary to establish that facts well pleaded in a complaint must be accepted as true in passing on the propriety of the entry of judgment on the pleadings. Accepting that criterion, Roy Earns has set forth in his complaint that: “After the children of the plaintiff gave the plaintiff the aerial bomb in question, the plaintiff, not knowing that the same was an unexploded firecracker and wishing to determine whether his children could safely play with the object in question, removed the top from the same and poured a part of the contents on the ground and attempted to ignite the contents. After the contents failed to ignite, the plaintiff, holding the remainder of the contents of the bomb, in his hand, turned from the scene when suddenly the firecracker held in the plaintiffs hand, violently exploded . . . .”
Such pleaded facts clearly indicate to me that Roy Earns “tested the danger” of the aerial bomb and that his actions, as pleaded, contributed to the happening of the accident and that he assumed without question the risk. I would, therefore, affirm the judgment entered by the court below against Roy Earns in his individual capacity.
Mr. Chief Justice Bell joins in this dissent.