Appeal from the Judgment entered November 14, 1984, in the Court of Common Pleas of Butler County, Civil, at No. A.D. 81-417, Book 120, Page 309.
Richard W. Epstein, Sharon, for appellants.
Lee C. McCandless, Butler, for appellee.
Cavanaugh, Brosky and Watkins, JJ.
[ 350 Pa. Super. Page 236]
This is an appeal from the judgment entered November 14, 1984, in the Court of Common Pleas of Butler County, Civil Division, granting appellee-defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment.
On July 26, 1979, the appellant Raymond E. Hess, was employed as an ironworker by Ferguson Steel Erectors and was installing covers on the conveyors at a coal processing plant located at Branchton, Butler County, PA. Fuellgraf
[ 350 Pa. Super. Page 237]
Electric Co. was the electrical contractor for the coal processing plant and their job was installing electrical safety devices. The appellant was standing on a conveyor belt and installing a turncover hood on an adjoining conveyor belt. Without any audible or visual warning, the conveyor belt on which the appellant was standing went into motion causing the appellant to fall into an angle iron running across the top of the conveyor in which he was drawn under, then thrown into a metal bin, thus, being seriously injured.
Subsequently, appellant-plaintiffs filed suit against appellee-defendant for personal injuries arising from this industrial accident. Appellee's motion for summary judgment was granted and this timely appeal followed.
The appellants present one question on appeal: Whether the court below erred in granting appellee's motion for summary judgment.
In Schacter v. Albert, 212 Pa. Superior Ct. 58, 239 A.2d 841 (1968), this Court set forth the rules to be followed in passing upon a Motion for Summary Judgment:
On motions for summary judgment, the Court must consider the entire setting of the case and all of the papers that are included in the record. One who moves for summary judgment has the burden of demonstrating clearly that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact. The Court must consider both the record actually presented and the record potentially possible at the time of trial. A hearing on a motion for summary judgment is not a trial on the merits, and the Court on such motion should not attempt to resolve conflicting contentions of fact. The Court is to accept as true all well pleaded facts in the plaintiff's pleadings as well as the admissions on file, giving to the plaintiff the benefit of all reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom. The record must be examined in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. In ...