Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Kelly
Appellate Court of Illinois
Memorandum.—Action for personal injuries. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. Samuel P. McConnell, Judge, presiding.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Waterman
It is true that there is no direct evidence that appellant had any knowledge of any defect in the hoisting apparatus.
The question in this regard is, was the defect such that as between master and servant, under the surrounding circumstances, the master is charged with a knowledge thereof which the servant is not. The master is bound to use reasonable care in providing safe machipery, appliances, surroundings, etc., and the servant, in the absence of notice that the machinery, etc., is unsafe or defective, has a right to rely upon the discharge by the master of his duty in respect to these…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad v. HinesIllinois Supreme Court · 1890
- Smith v. Peninsular Car WorksMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
- Columbus, Chicago & Indiana Central Railway Co. v. TroeschIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
- O'Connor v. AdamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- McGowan v. La Plata Mining & Smelting Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Colorado · 1882
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ambrose v. AngusAppellate Court of Illinois · 1895