Michalski v. American MacHine & Foundry Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered October 9, 1916, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The defendant did everything that a reasonably careful and prudent man could have done under the circumstances and is, therefore, not liable for the plaintiff’s injury.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered October 9, 1916, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict. The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The defendant did everything that a reasonably careful and prudent man could have done under the circumstances and is, therefore, not liable for the plaintiff’s injury. (Bushtis v. C. C. Co., 128 App. Div. 780; 198 N. Y. 548; West v. B. M. Co., 128 N. W. Rep. 992.) Appellant was guilty of negligence in that it…
1Opinion of the CourtCollin, J.
The action is, servant against master, to recover damages for the alleged negligence of the defendant in failing to comply with a statute in that it did not guard the cutter of a milling machine. The Appellate Division by a decision not unanimous affirmed the judgment consequent upon the verdict of the jury in favor of the plaintiff. If there was not evidence that tended to support the verdict, the denial of the defendant’s motion that the complaint be dismissed and the submission of the case to the jury were errors. (Heskell v. Auburn L., H. & P. Co., 209 N. Y. 86.) We are to determine under…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Glens Falls Portland Cement Co. v. Travelers' InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Heskell v. Auburn Light, Heat & Power Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1913
- Scott v. . International Paper Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1912
- Pyne v. . Cazenovia Canning Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ford v. . McAdooNew York Court of Appeals · 1921
- Michalek v. United States Gypsum Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935