Dane v. Cochrane Chemical Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, under the employers’ liability act, St. 1887, c. 270, for personal injuries. The second count of the amended declaration, which is the only one material to be stated, was as follows: “ And the plaintiff says that on or about the twenty-third day of November, 1891, he was in the employ of the defendant, at its factory in Everett, in this Commonwealth, as a carpenter, doing certain work on the buildings of said defendant; that he was working under the superintendence and…
Read the full summary
Tort, under the employers’ liability act, St. 1887, c. 270, for personal injuries. The second count of the amended declaration, which is the only one material to be stated, was as follows: “ And the plaintiff says that on or about the twenty-third day of November, 1891, he was in the employ of the defendant, at its factory in Everett, in this Commonwealth, as a carpenter, doing certain work on the buildings of said defendant; that he was working under the superintendence and direction of one Fred Johnson, who was in the service of the defendant company, intrusted by it with and exercising…
1Opinion of the CourtField, C. J.
At the argument, no objection was made that the notice given was not sufficient, or might not have been found by the jury to be sufficient, and it was not contended by the plaintiff that the ladders used could have been found by the jury to be a part of the ways, works, or machinery of the defendant, within the meaning of St. 1887, c. 270, § 1. The plaintiff relied *455upon the second count of the amended declaration, and the principal although not the only question argued is whether there was evidence for the jury that Fred Johnson was a servant of the defendant intrusted with and exercising…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Linnehan v. RollinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1884
- Morgan v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
- Reagan v. CaseyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
- Harkins v. Standard Sugar RefineryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
3Cited by11 opinions
- McDermott's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
- Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. BennettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Sullivan v. New Bedford Gas & Edison Light Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Dutton v. Amesbury National BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
- Callahan v. Trustees of Phillips AcademyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.