Ragolsky v. Nurenberg

The injury to the plaintiff’s eye resulted from the bursting of a bottle while he was working for the defendants upon a machine for bottling tonics. The only evidence in the case was the testimony of the plamtiff. In consequence of his imperfect command of the English language and the fact that some of his explanations were indicated to the jury by motions of the hands and appear in the exceptions only by the word “indicating,” which conveys no meaning to us, the meagre record fails to dis*576close an adequate description of the machine and of important details connected with the accident.…