Gallienne v. Becker Bros. Shoe Co.

The plaintiff’s employment by the defendant as a “fancy stitcher” brought her in proximity to power driven machinery in a factory where five or more persons were engaged in manual or mechanical labor. This is not disputed. She was, therefore, engaged in an employment described in P. L., c. 178, s. 1, cl. ii, and it follows that she is entitled to compensation “whenever and wherever” she was injured provided her injury arose “out of and in the course of the employment.” White v. Company, 85 N. H. 543, 544.

The defendant contends that the plaintiff’s injury cannot be found to have arisen “out of…