Duerst v. St. Louis Stamping Co.
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis County Circuit Court. — Hon. Rudolph, Hirzel, Judge. (1) Tbe petition on wbicb this suit is founded does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. It is not a defective statement of a good cause of action, which would be cured by a judgment, but is fatally defective. There is no •allegation of negligence on the part of defendant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis County Circuit Court. — Hon. Rudolph, Hirzel, Judge. (1) Tbe petition on wbicb this suit is founded does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. It is not a defective statement of a good cause of action, which would be cured by a judgment, but is fatally defective. There is no •allegation of negligence on the part of defendant. It is not alleged that the defendant furnished a tool dangerous to plaintiff for the kind of business in which he was engaged; nor that defendant furnished a dangerous or unsafe hammer at all; nor that the chipping of the…
1Opinion of the CourtValliant, J.
Action for damages for personal injuries.
Defendant is a corporation engaged in manufacturing articles of tinware and granite ironware. Plaintiff was an employee of defendant; his work was to insert the curved or looped end of a wire handle into a part of a utensil in process of manufacture, and strike it with a hammer with a sufficient force to close the curved end so that it would not slip out. Eor this work plaintiff was furnished with a steel mandrel, attached to his workbench, and a steel hammer; there was a groove in the mandrel into which the wire was laid to receive the stroke of the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Stephens v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
- Doyle v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Trust Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Young v. Shickle, Harrison & Howard Iron Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1890
- McDermott v. ClaasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
- Herdler v. Buck's Stove & Range Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1896
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Cech v. Mallinckrodt Chemical Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1929
- Reynolds v. St. Louis Transit Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- Goransson v. Riter-Conley Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- Sommers v. St. Louis Transit Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1904
- Lee v. St. Louis, Memphis & Southeastern RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.