Legal Opinion

Cole v. North American Lead Co.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided March 31, 1908PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from Madison Circuit Court. — Hon. Chas. A. Killian, Judge. Tbe court erred in instructing tbe jury to return a verdict for the defendant: First. Because tbe testimony shows that tbe machine or appliance upon which plaintiff received his injuries was a dangerous one and came within the class of machinery required to he guarded, by section 6433, Revised Statutes 1899. Second. Because the evidence shows that the machine was not guarded, but could have been.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Madison Circuit Court. — Hon. Chas. A. Killian, Judge. Tbe court erred in instructing tbe jury to return a verdict for the defendant: First. Because tbe testimony shows that tbe machine or appliance upon which plaintiff received his injuries was a dangerous one and came within the class of machinery required to he guarded, by section 6433, Revised Statutes 1899. Second. Because the evidence shows that the machine was not guarded, but could have been. Mill sap v. Beggs, 122 Mo. App. 1; Colloit v. American Mfg. Co., 71 Mo. App. 163; Lore v. Manufacturing Co., 160 Mo. 608; Blair v.…

1Opinion of the CourtGoode, J.

This plaintiff lost part of bis right band in consequence of its slipping against tbe knives of a planing machine in defendant’s factory and instituted this action for damages. The machine consisted of a metallic table, with a smooth surface. The table which is about a foot in width, is divided into two sections, the section in front of the knives being adjustable at different heights. Between the two sections were the planing knives. They were set in a metallic cylinder or axle which rotated rapidly. In planing the operator would lower the adjustable table so the surface of the board to be…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lore v. American Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1901
  2. Smith v. Forrester-Nace Box Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
  3. Millsap v. BeggsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Austin v. Bluff City Shoe Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1913
  2. Halloran v. Pullman Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1910

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

Powered by the Exa API