Legal Opinion
Van Leet v. Kilmer
New York Court of Appeals
Decided January 7, 1930PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Brien, J.
Defendant generates electric power for his own use at Binghamton and also supplies it for profit to the United Shoe Machinery Corporation in the same city. A direct current of one hundred and ten volts, transmitted from his premises along insulated low power wires, is carried into the shoe machinery factory. Between two points at which these wires are attached to the exterior wall of that factory is a circular opening flush with the wall. This opening constitutes the outlet for a blower located inside the building and its lowest curve is placed more than twenty-three feet above the pavement.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Braun v. . Buffalo General Electric Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1911
- Adams v. . BullockNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Burrows v. Livingston-Niagara Power Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926
- Burrows v. Livingston-Niagara Power CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1926
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- McCrink v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1947
- Miner v. Long Island Lighting Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1976
- De Salvo v. Stanley-Mark-Strand Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1939
- Frye v. McCrory Stores CorporationWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1959
- Payne v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.