Kopacin v. Crown-Columbia Pulp & Paper Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
From Clackamas: Jambs U. Campbell, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice Bean. This is an action by John Kopacin against the Crown-Columbia Pulp & Paper Co., a corporation, for damages. The facts are as follows: At the time of the injury complained of, plaintiff was engaged in operating a “wet machine” for defendant in its paper mill at Oregpn City. This machine consists, in part, of two large revolving cylinders or rollers, between which the pulp passes and is compressed.
Read the full summary
From Clackamas: Jambs U. Campbell, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice Bean. This is an action by John Kopacin against the Crown-Columbia Pulp & Paper Co., a corporation, for damages. The facts are as follows: At the time of the injury complained of, plaintiff was engaged in operating a “wet machine” for defendant in its paper mill at Oregpn City. This machine consists, in part, of two large revolving cylinders or rollers, between which the pulp passes and is compressed. The pulp is carried between these rollers by means of a felt, upon which it rests, which extends the full width of the…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Bean
At the' conclusion of plaintiff’s evidence, counsel for defendant asked for a nonsuit, which was denied, and also requested a directed verdict for defendant. The rulings of the court upon these points are assigned as error. It was the duty of plaintiff, as operator of the machine, to cut off the pulp or sulphite, and to regulate the felt when necessary. At the time of the accident, plaintiff had been working for defendant about a month, operating the machine. He claimed that he stepped upon the board in the usual manner, about two feet toward the middle, for the purpose of reaching the wheel…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Dolner v. The MonticelloU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1870
- Johnston v. Oregon Short Line Ry. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1892
- Galvin v. Brown & McCabeOregon Supreme Court · 1909
- Roth v. Northern Pacific Lumbering Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1889
- Carroll v. Grande Ronde Electric Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1906
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Mickel v. Haines Enterprises, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1965
- Seneca Consol. Gold Mines Co. v. Great Western Power Co.California Supreme Court · 1930
- Gekas v. Oregon-Washington R. & N. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1915
- Selden-Breck Const. Co. v. LinnettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Morandas v. L. R. Wattis Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1914
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.