Legal Opinion

Petrilli v. Swift & Co.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided April 7, 1924PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTrimble, P. J.

This is an action for damages by an employee in defendant’s meat packing plant at St. Joseph. There was a verdict for defendant, and plaintiff filed motion for new trial, which the court sustained without assigning a reason therefor. Thereupon the defendant appealed.

The petition alleged, in substance, that it was plaintiff’s duty as an employee in defendant’s plant to pull truck loads of meat from one place to another; that it was defendant’s duty to furnish help to plaintiff, sufficient to render it reasonably safe; that on the day he was injured, plaintiff was engaged in ^pulling a truck…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Worlds v. Georgia RailroadSupreme Court of Georgia · 1896
  2. Ferguson v. Phoenix Cotton HillsTennessee Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Haviland v. Kansas City, Pittsburg & Gulf RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
  4. Stenvog v. Minnesota Transfer Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
  5. Lindsay v. ShanerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1921

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hunter v. Busy Bee Candy Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1925
  2. Gulf, C. S. F. R. Co. v. SpiveyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932
  3. McFarland v. B. F. Goodrich Rubber Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1931
  4. Bankers Mortgage Co. v. OsbornMissouri Court of Appeals · 1930
  5. Gulf, C. S. F. R. Co. v. SpiveyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API