Legal Opinion

Hovis v. Cudahy Refining Co.

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided May 8, 1915No. 19,491PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from Montgomery district court; Thomas J. Flannelly, judge. .

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Marshall, J.:

This is a suit for damages on account of a personal injury sustained by the plaintiff on October 7, 1912, while employed by the defendant in its plant at Coffeyville, Kan. The plaintiff secured judgment for $2999. The defendant appeals.

The petition alleges three grounds of negligence; first, in furnishing a diamond-point chisel which was not in a reasonably safe condition; second, in failing to furnish competent fellow workmen; third, in not warning plaintiff of the dangers incident to the work in which he was engaged.

The evidence tends to…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Borgnis v. Falk Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Ives v. South Buffalo Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1911
  3. Mather v. RillstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  4. Shade v. Ash Grove Lime & Portland Cement Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1914
  5. Gorrell v. BattelleSupreme Court of Kansas · 1914

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Manzanares v. BellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1974
  2. Mudd v. Neosho Memorial Regional Medical CenterSupreme Court of Kansas · 2003
  3. Taylor v. HostetlerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1960
  4. Tarin v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1916
  5. Schmeling v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1933

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API