Legal Opinion

Handy v. Mercantile Lumber Co.

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1920No. 20964PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from the circuit court of Hinds county. Hon. W. H. Potter, Judge. Action by Mitchell Handy against the Mercantile Lumber Company. Prom a judgment for defendánt, plaintiff appeals. The facts aré fully stated in the opinion of the court. Every violation of law enacted for the protection of another, that is the proximate cause of injury to that other, is negligence per se, and actionable. Inland Steel Go. v. Yedinak, 172 Ind. 423, 87 N. E. 229, 139 Am.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the circuit court of Hinds county. Hon. W. H. Potter, Judge. Action by Mitchell Handy against the Mercantile Lumber Company. Prom a judgment for defendánt, plaintiff appeals. The facts aré fully stated in the opinion of the court. Every violation of law enacted for the protection of another, that is the proximate cause of injury to that other, is negligence per se, and actionable. Inland Steel Go. v. Yedinak, 172 Ind. 423, 87 N. E. 229, 139 Am. St. Rep. 391; Nickey v. Steuder, 164 Ind. 186, 73 N, E. 117; Payne v. Chicago, -etc., R. Co., 129 Mo. 405, 31 S. W. 885; Bludorn v.…

1Opinion of the CourtSykes, J.

The appellee, Mitchell Handy, as plaintiff, by next friend, filed suit in the circuit court of Hinds county against the defendant, Mercantile Lumber Company, for damages for personal injuries. The declaration, in short, alleges that the lumber company violated the ten-hour labor law in his case by permitting him to work all day and all night. This law is found in chapter 239 of the Laws of 1916, sections 4523 and 4524, Hemingway’s Code, and in part provides that: “It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation engaged in manufacturing or repairing, to work their employees more than…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. J. J. Newman Lumber Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Bledsoe v. Bostic Lumber & Mfg. Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Buckeye Cotton Oil Co. v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1912

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Graham v. GoodwinMississippi Supreme Court · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API