Bailey v. Mukilteo Lumber Co.
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the superior court for Snohomish county, Black, J., entered May 10, 1906, granting the plaintiff a new trial, after first granting the defendant’s motion for a nonsuit, in an action by an employee for personal injuries sustained by the splitting of a log in a sawmill.
1Opinion of the CourtDunbar, J.
Undertaking to abbreviate the respondent’s statement of this case, which we think is practically justified by the testimony, respondent was employed by appellant in its sawmill as helper on the splitter deck. “Splitter deck” is the term used for that portion of the mill in which logs too large for convenient handling in the mill proper are sawed *582lengthwise into quarters. The equipment of the splitter deck consisted of a saw carriage with a slot in the middle running through its length. Through this slot there ran a band saw. The operation of the splitter device consisted of the rolling of a…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cited by12 opinions
- Lyons v. Redding Construction Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1973
- Cummins v. DufaultWashington Supreme Court · 1943
- Ford v. Heffernan Engine WorksWashington Supreme Court · 1908
- Hull v. DavenportWashington Supreme Court · 1916
- Beseloff v. StrandbergWashington Supreme Court · 1911
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.