Strauss v. Haberman Manufacturing Co.

In the original decision of this appeal we did not overlook the point urged upon us on this motion for a reargument. 48 N. Y. Supp. 425. The evidence of the witness Levin tended to show that the machine itself was defective at the time the plaintiff was put ■at work thereon. Hé testified that for three days before the accident the die would come down without the foot being placed on the ■treadle, and that the reason for the difficulty was that the spring which would hold the treadle up was not properly fastened. This testimony was sufficient to permit the jury to infer that the master either…