Ebbert v. Philadelphia Electric Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Maxey,
This is an action in trespass for damages arising from personal injuries. The victim was Esther E. Ebbert; the instrumentality was an electrically driven wringer attached to an electric washing machine. The two rollers of the wringer were equipped with a “release bar” marked at each end “Touch Release,” which when pushed doAvn by human touch was designed to cause the rollers to spring apart four or five inches to release anything caught therein. Its status in this case is that of a “safety device.” Mrs. Ebbert’s finger tips were drawn between the rollers while she…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- MacPherson v. . Buick Motor Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Guinan v. Famous Players-Lasky Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
- Dushane v. BenedictSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Boston Woven Hose & Rubber Co. v. KendallMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
- King Hardware Co. v. EnnisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by72 opinions
- Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1960
- Foley v. the Pittsburgh-Des Moines Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
- Maize v. Atlantic Refining Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1945
- Dyson v. General Motors CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1969
- Greco v. Bucciconi Engineering Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1969
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.