Bloss v. Pure Oil Co.
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtSenn, J.
The facts are, briefly, these: The plaintiff and one Melvin Diefendorf were copartners conducting a garage at Chittenango. The defendant, pursuant to a contract with Bloss & Diefendorf, was installing for them on their garage premises a gasoline pump. The work was in charge of a Mr. Salisbury and one or two assistants. In laying some pipes to connect the pump with the gasoline tank it was necessary to raise a cement or stone block from the walk on the garage premises. The block was about five feet in width and of considerable weight, said by one witness to be about half a ton. Salisbury came…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cannon v. . FargoNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Fiesel v. New York Edison Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- Geibel v. ElwellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
- Mandala v. WellsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
- Lipari v. . the Bush Terminal CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Larson v. Independent School District No. 11JIdaho Supreme Court · 1933
- Rice v. IsbellNew York Supreme Court · 1947
- Bloss v. Pure Oil Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930