Boland v. Great Northern Ry. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Washington; George'Don worth, Judge. Action by James Boland against the Great Northern Railway Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.
Read the full summary
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Washington; George'Don worth, Judge. Action by James Boland against the Great Northern Railway Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. The plaintiff in error was the plaintiff in the court below, and he alleged in his complaint in substance that, while working as a section laborer for the defendant, the latter negligently furnished him with a defective cold chisel to be used with a hammer; that, while using the same in a proper manner, a small chip flew from the head of the cold chisel and put…
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). [1] The testimony set forth in the foregoing statement of facts, which was admitted over the objection of the plaintiff, was offered in response to certain testimony of the plaintiff. The complaint had charged the defendant with negligence. It had not named any officer of the defendant, nor had it set forth that the duty of the master to furnish safe appliances had been delegated to any one. On the trial the plaintiff testified, however, that. Pat Boland, the section foreman, furnished the tools to work with; that he hired and discharged the men, and there…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hermanek v. Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1911
- Port Blakely Mill Co. v. GarrettCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1899
- Telander v. SunlinU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota · 1891
3Cited by2 opinions
- Alvarado v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1925
- Martin v. Washington Times Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1937