Chielinsky v. Hoopes & Townsend Co.
Superior Court of Delaware
This was an action upon the case for the loss of the left arm, which the plaintiff alleged resulted through the negligence of the defendant company. The facts of the case will more fully appear from the charge of the Court.
Read the full summary
This was an action upon the case for the loss of the left arm, which the plaintiff alleged resulted through the negligence of the defendant company. The facts of the case will more fully appear from the charge of the Court. At the trial the following questions were objected to and ruled upon : Bird, for the plaintiff, asked the witness, William Brown, the following question: “ What was the custom of the shop, both while Chielinsky worked there and before he worked there, as to men and boys putting the belt on the main shafting ?” To this question Spruance, for the defendant, objected as…
1Opinion of the CourtLore, C. J.
The contention as we understand it is that either by order or by permission—the defendant looking on and consenting—this boy went up and put on this belt, that being dangerous work.
Whatever took place in that boy’s presence by the defendant’s order or permission during the time that he worked there and of which he had knowledge and which informed his mind as to his duty and his rights is clearly and unquestionably evidence. But when you go beyond that we do not think it evidence.
Suppose you are permitted to prove in this case that this company either ordered or permitted John Brown or Thomas *275S…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Lake v. Atlantic WorksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
- Barrett v. . the Third Avenue R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Grand Trunk Railway Co. v. CummingsSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Coombs v. New Bedford Cordage Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Railroad Company v. FortSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Yarrington v. ThornburgSupreme Court of Delaware · 1964
- Guy J. Johnson Transportation Co. v. DunkleSupreme Court of Delaware · 1988