Legal Opinion

Cleveland Provision Co. v. Hague

Cuyahoga Circuit Court

Decided January 22, 1912PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Error.

1Opinion of the CourtMarvin, J.

The relation of the parties here is in the reverse order from what is was in the court below. The terms plaintiff and de*224fendant used in this opinion refer to the parties as they were in the original ease. .

Plaintiff brought suit against the defendant, which is a corporation, claiming to recover for injuries received by him while working at the plant of the defendant in the city of Cleveland, on June 16, 1910. At that date the defendant was having the electric wires in its plant changed so that the wires should pass through a conduit, that is, that they should be covered instead of exposed.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hall, Headington & Co. v. PooleCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1901
  2. Donovan v. GaySupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
  3. Beatty v. Metropolitan Building Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Farmer's & Mechanic's National Bank v. HanksCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1910
  5. Soderstrom v. PattenAppellate Court of Illinois · 1907

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. JonesOhio Supreme Court · 2012
  2. State v. JonesOhio Supreme Court · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API