Fay v. Wilmarth
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort for personal injuries while in the employ of the defendants, with two counts as described by the court. Writ dated March 23, 1899. At the trial in the Superior Court before GrasMll, J., the plaintiff introduced evidence tending to show the following facts: The defendants were building contractors and at the time of the accident on January 24, 1899, the plaintiff was in their employ as a hod carrier and a tender to stone masons.
Read the full summary
Tort for personal injuries while in the employ of the defendants, with two counts as described by the court. Writ dated March 23, 1899. At the trial in the Superior Court before GrasMll, J., the plaintiff introduced evidence tending to show the following facts: The defendants were building contractors and at the time of the accident on January 24, 1899, the plaintiff was in their employ as a hod carrier and a tender to stone masons. The -defendants were engaged in erecting a building on Binney Street in East Cambridge, and were using in connection with their work a derrick tower, which was…
1Opinion of the CourtMorton, J.
This is an action of tort for personal injuries. There was a count at common law, and one under the employers’ liability act. The count at common law was for setting the plaintiff to work in an unsafe place without warning him of the danger. The count under the employers’ liability act was for the negligence of a person acting as superintendent. At the close of the plaintiff’s evidence the judge ordered a verdict for the defendants. The case is here on exceptions by the plaintiff to this ruling.
We think that the ruling was right. The substance of the plaintiff’s case is that the hammer fell…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Trim v. Fore River Ship Building Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- McMahon v. RiceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Moran v. City of ChelseaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907