Arizona Lumber & Timber Co. v. Mooney
Arizona Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District in and for the County of Coconino. E. W. Wells, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtRouse, J.
This is an action for damages for personal injuries which plaintiff received while working in defendant’s sawmill. Plaintiff was operating a certain machine, called a “resaw.” It was his duty to insert hoards into said machine to be sawed, which work may be called “feeding.” ■His position was in front of the machine while it was in operation, and behind the machine another employee was stationed, whose duty it was to receive the lumber after it had passed through said machine, and dispose of it. While plaintiff was thus engaged in operating said machine, in some way a piece or splinter of a…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Marsh v. . ChickeringNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Burke v. . WitherbeeNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Sweeney v. . Berlin and Jones Envelope Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Wonder v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1870
- Haley v. . EarleNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Flynn v. GordonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1933
- Consolidated Stone Co. v. RedmonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1899
- Gila Valley, Globe, & Northern Railroad v. LyonArizona Supreme Court · 1903
- Vernon Cotton Oil Co. v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1911
- Selhaver v. Dover Lumber Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1918
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.