## Facts

- George Green was employed by Riverside Iron-Workers Co. as a painter on a bridge project.
- Green had prior experience as a construction painter and was used to working on scaffoldings and at high elevations.
- For about ten days before the accident, Green crossed a plank used as a gangway to reach parts of the bridge work.
- The plank rested on steelwork at one end, but the other end was completely exposed.
- The plank was not permanently fastened or secured to keep it from shifting.
- Anyone using the plank could see, on passing over it, that it was unsecured and could move, and the danger from that condition was immediately apparent.
- Green was injured when the unfastened plank moved while he was using it.
- Green sued Riverside for negligence, claiming Riverside failed to furnish a reasonably safe place to work and reasonably safe appliances.
- Riverside asserted assumption of risk as a defense.
- The trial court found for Green and awarded damages, and Riverside appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether an experienced employee who continues to use a plainly unfastened gangplank, where the lack of fastening and resulting danger are obvious, is barred from recovering for employer negligence under assumption of risk.
2. Whether the obvious nature of the condition allows the court to decide assumption of risk as a matter of law rather than leaving it to the factfinder.

## Decision

- The court ruled for Riverside Iron-Workers Co.
- The court held that Green assumed the risk of injury from the plank because the condition (unfastened and liable to move) and the danger were open, visible, and readily understood by anyone using it, including Green.
- The court reversed the judgment entered for Green and granted relief consistent with the assumption-of-risk holding.

## Legal Principles

- A servant assumes the risks ordinarily incident to the work, including risks from defects or dangers that are known to the servant or so open and obvious that the servant must be taken to know and understand them.
- When a danger is apparent and the servant voluntarily continues to work with that danger, the servant cannot recover from the master for injuries resulting from that known condition.
- If the evidence shows the condition and danger were obvious and the servant had experience and opportunity to observe them, assumption of risk may be decided by the court as a matter of law.

## Conclusion

Because the plank’s unsecured condition and the likelihood it could shift were plainly visible and immediately recognizable to an experienced worker who used it daily, the court treated Green’s injury as arising from a risk he accepted by continuing to use the gangway, and it reversed the trial court’s negligence judgment in his favor.


Riverside Iron-Workers Co. v. Green, 100 P. 482 (1909)