Legal Opinion

Deegan v. Gutta Percha & Rubber Manufacturing Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 5, 1909PublishedCited by 2 opinions

• Appeal by the defendant, The Gutta. Percha and Rubber Manufacturing Oompany, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk -of the county of Kings on the 4tli day of February, 1908, upon the verdict of a jury for $10,000 rendered by direction of the court after a trial at the Kings County Trial Term, certain questions of fact having been submitted to the jury, and also from two orders entered in said clerk’s office on…

Read the full summary

• Appeal by the defendant, The Gutta. Percha and Rubber Manufacturing Oompany, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk -of the county of Kings on the 4tli day of February, 1908, upon the verdict of a jury for $10,000 rendered by direction of the court after a trial at the Kings County Trial Term, certain questions of fact having been submitted to the jury, and also from two orders entered in said clerk’s office on the 5th and 21st days of February, 1908, respectively, denying the defendant’s motion, made upon the minutes, to set aside…

1Opinion of the Court

Jenks, J.:

This action is by a. servant against master . for negligence. A notice under the Employers’ Liability Act was served. The servant worked at a mill that was one of a series, all worked by a shaft that ran underneath them, and driven by steam power. The mill consisted of two rollers turning toward one another in the same plane. The rollers were of iron, 12ijr inches in diameter and 36 inches long. There was a clutch and pinion wheel on the shaft, which transmitted power to a large gear wheel which turned the back roller, which worked another gear wheel that turned the front roller.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Ehrgott v. . Mayor, Etc., of City of N.Y.New York Court of Appeals · 1884
  2. Hickey v. . TaaffeNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
  3. Chrystal v. . Troy Boston R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1887
  4. Taylor v. FelsingIllinois Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Weitzman v. Nassau Electric RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Hartman v. The Berlin & Jones Envelope Co.New York Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Collins v. Waterbury Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911

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

Powered by the Exa API