Quinn v. Electric Laundry Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMelvin, J.
This is an action for damages by a young woman, employed by defendant corporation, who was severely injured while operating a mangle in defendant’s laundry. Judgment for twenty-five hundred dollars was given in favor of plaintiff. From the judgment and from the order denying a new trial this appeal is prosecuted.
It is alleged in the complaint that plaintiff, who was about nineteen years of age, was wholly unfamiliar with the operation of machinery; that she had been engaged by defendant as a “shaker out,” and that as such she was required to shake garments and prepare them for the mangling…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Foley v. California Horseshoe Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Helling v. SchindlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Ingerman v. MooreCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Stager v. Troy Laundry Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1902
- Verdelli v. Gray's Harbor Commercial Co.California Supreme Court · 1897
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Jacobson v. Oakland Meat & Packing Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
- Tucker v. CooperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Moore v. BurtonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
- Guyer v. Sterling Laundry Co.California Supreme Court · 1916
- Cooley v. Brunswig Drug Co.California Court of Appeal · 1916
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.