Legal Opinion

Hare v. McIntire

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided January 4, 1890PublishedCited by 10 opinions

On report. This was an action to recover damages of the defendant, which the plaintiff claimed he had sustained by reason of a blast fired by the defendant in a granite quarry, of which the plaintiff gave the defendant no notice. The plaintiff was a stone cutter employed in the sheds and the defendant was a ledge man in charge of the blasting. The case is stated in the opinion. “Approaching” in the statute is not a word of limitation.

Read the full summary

On report. This was an action to recover damages of the defendant, which the plaintiff claimed he had sustained by reason of a blast fired by the defendant in a granite quarry, of which the plaintiff gave the defendant no notice. The plaintiff was a stone cutter employed in the sheds and the defendant was a ledge man in charge of the blasting. The case is stated in the opinion. “Approaching” in the statute is not a word of limitation. It means to include all those not engaged in blasting. Winslow v. Kimball, 25 Maine, 493, 495. Otherwise, it would defeat the purpose of the statute originally…

1Opinion of the CourtVirgin, J.

An action by one workman in a granite quarry against his fellow-workman, to recover damages for a jiersonal injury alleged to have been caused by a rock thrown from a blast discharged by the defendant. The case comes up on a report of the evidence ; and if the action is maintainable it is to stand for trial for the assessment of damages.

The action is founded on R. S., c. 17, §§ 23 and 24, the material provisions of which, — including the words in brackets found in the original act of 1852, c. 257 — are as follows : (23) “Persons engaged in blasting lime rock or other rocks, shall before each…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Griffiths v. WolframSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
  2. Hinds v. HarbouIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
  3. Hinds v. OverackerIndiana Supreme Court · 1879

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Zimmer v. CaseySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
  2. McKellar v. Clark Equipment Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1984
  3. Anderson v. Pittsburgh Coal Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
  4. Palmer v. Inhabitants of SumnerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1935
  5. Tucker v. Northern Terminal Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1902

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API