Cunningham v. Fort Pitt Bridge Works
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 67, Oct. T., 1900, by defendant, from judgment of O. P. Washington Co., Nov. T., 1899, No. 13, on verdict for plaintiff, in case of Annie Cunningham, Administratrix of James E. Cunningham, deceased, v. Fort Pitt Bridge Works. Trespass for death of plaintiff’s husband.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 67, Oct. T., 1900, by defendant, from judgment of O. P. Washington Co., Nov. T., 1899, No. 13, on verdict for plaintiff, in case of Annie Cunningham, Administratrix of James E. Cunningham, deceased, v. Fort Pitt Bridge Works. Trespass for death of plaintiff’s husband. Before Taylob, J. At the trial it appeared that James Cunningham, plaintiff’s husband died as the result of injuries received on September 27, 1898, while at work moving heavy structural iron in defendant’s iron works. The action was originally brought by James E. Cunningham who died, and his widow as his…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Mitchelu,
The facts as to how the accident occurred are practically undisputed. A number of iron flooring beams had been stored on one end of a pair of skids and it was desired to move them to the other end. They were something less than a ton each in weight, large and unwieldy in shape, being about fourteen feet long, from five to seven feet high, and stood upon edge on a flange which gave a base of live to seven inches according to different witnesses. There were eighteen of them in all, and to secure them in place they had been tied with rope to two upright pieces or…
2Cases cited1 opinion
3Cited by18 opinions
- Chambers v. Mesta Machine Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
- McAdoo v. Autenreith's Dollar StoresSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- Smith v. Philadelphia Traction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Sorensen v. Quaker City Poster Advertising Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- McGeehan v. HughesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.