Lanza v. Legrand Quarry Co.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Marshall District Gourt. — IIon. G. W. Burn-ham, Judge. Prtor to his injury the plaintiff had been employed in the defendant’s quarry for a number of years as a quarry-man. In November, 1897, he, with three others, was working in said quarry under the direction of a foreman.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Marshall District Gourt. — IIon. G. W. Burn-ham, Judge. Prtor to his injury the plaintiff had been employed in the defendant’s quarry for a number of years as a quarry-man. In November, 1897, he, with three others, was working in said quarry under the direction of a foreman. He alleges that at said time the foreman directed one Caputo and himself to leave the particular place where they were then at work, and to go to the top of a ledge or bench of rock in said quarry, and blast the same; that they went to the ledge as directed, and found a hole there, such as was usually used for…
1Opinion of the CourtSherwin, J.
*3011 2 *3033 *300There is a conflict in the evidence as to whether the plaintiff was directed to do the work he was *301engaged in at the time he was injured, or whether he voluntarily left his other work to--'engage therein. The evidence conclusively shows, however, that he and Caputo went to the ledge in question, and there found the old hole which had been drilled for blasting purposes. Caputo says that he explored’it, and found it about two feet deep; that he then placed therein a stick of dynamite about an inch long, and pushed it down the hole some six inches, where it stuck; that the ’ plaintiff then…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Neveu v. SearsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1892
- Burke v. AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1895
3Cited by2 opinions
- Lanza v. LeGrand Quarry Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1904
- Coles v. Union Terminal Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1904