Patterson v. Harrisburg Trust Co.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 7, May T., 1904, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Dauphin Co., Sept. T.,1903, No. 251, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Banks Patterson v. Harrisburg Trust Company, receiver of the Dauphin Bridge and Construction Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Kunkel, J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for §1,701.60. Defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 7, May T., 1904, by plaintiff, from judgment of C. P. Dauphin Co., Sept. T.,1903, No. 251, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Banks Patterson v. Harrisburg Trust Company, receiver of the Dauphin Bridge and Construction Company. Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries. Before Kunkel, J. The facts appear by the opinion of the Supreme Court. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for §1,701.60. Defendant appealed. Error assigned was in refusing binding instructions for defendant.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mb. Justice Fell,
In the business of manufacturing structural iron and steel, *175conducted by the defendant as a receiver, use was made of a large stationary riveting machine driven by compressed air. The pieces of iron and steel to be riveted were held in place by bolts which passed through them, and were swung from a traveling crane which moved on girders above the machine and carried the pieces between its jaws. In each jaw there was set a cylindrical piece of steel oh which there was a hollow or cup, the size and shape of the head of a rivet. One of the cups was fixed, the other was…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Baranski v. WilmsenSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Hemscher v. DobsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908
- Houston v. Budke Stamping Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909